Columbus (OH) Tower Design Requires More Eyes | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-05.13.24

Airborne-NextGen-05.07.24

Airborne-Unlimited-05.08.24 Airborne-FlightTraining-05.09.24

Airborne-Unlimited-05.10.24

Tue, Sep 30, 2003

Columbus (OH) Tower Design Requires More Eyes

Now, It Just Looks Like Another 'Jobs' Program

Now that it's built, and equipment is moving in, what might be a "hole" in design simulation software is starting to show up, at the new Port Columbus (OH) International Airport tower.

The tower, 224 feet tall, was supposed -- everyone assumed -- to have given unobstructed views of all the movement areas at the airport. As long as they didn't put the equipment in there, it probably would have, too -- but with the screens and things in place, some of the controllers have told the press that it's going to take more people up there, to see what needs to be seen. Besides, the tower, they now know, can't face two directions at once. After all, it has just 16 sides.

The FAA now plans to use double crews in the tower, to make sure everything that needs to be seen, will be seen.

Controllers had suggested raising the floor; the FAA noted that, if that were done, they couldn't see enough of the sky.

The tower, located between the two main runways, will need 25% more union controllers than the present design, raising the total complement from 48 to 60. [That's what the government calls, 'doubling' --ed.]

The tower, slated to become operational in April, was hosting tours, when one of the alert controllers noticed he couldn't see part of the north runway. Sure enough, when he repositioned himself to see that area, he couldn't see other things. Thus began some lively discussions.

The contractor said that seeing all movement areas wasn't part of the specification. Sure enough. Oops...

FMI: www.faa.gov

Advertisement

More News

Airborne 05.10.24: Icon Auction, Drunk MedEvac Pilot, Bell ALFA

Also: SkyReach Parts Support, Piper Service Ctr, Airliner Near-Miss, Airshow London The Judge overseeing Icon's convoluted Chapter 11 process has approved $9 million in Chapter 11 >[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (05.13.24): ILS PRM Approach

ILS PRM Approach An instrument landing system (ILS) approach conducted to parallel runways whose extended centerlines are separated by less than 4,300 feet and at least 3,000 feet >[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (05.13.24)

Aero Linx: FlyPups FlyPups transports dogs from desperate situations to fosters, no-kill shelters, and fur-ever homes. We deliver trained dogs to veterans for service and companion>[...]

Airborne-NextGen 05.07.24: AI-Piloted F-16, AgEagle, 1st 2 WorldView Sats

Also: Skydio Chief, Uncle Sam Sues, Dash 7 magniX, OR UAS Accelerator US Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall was given a turn around the patch in the 'X-62A Variable In-flight>[...]

Airborne 05.08.24: Denali Update, Dad-Daughter Gyro, Lake SAIB

Also: NBAA on FAA Reauth, DJI AG Drones, HI Insurance Bill Defeated, SPSA Airtankers The Beechcraft Denali continues moving forward towards certification, having received its FAA T>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2024 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC