Skip to main content

19690026483 · General-aviation pilot reactions to and opinions on grooved runways

NASA · 1969

Open the PDFPublic domain · NASATechnical Reports

Overview

Aviation pilot reactions and opinions on grooved runways

Pages
·
29
Chapters
·
4

Key points

  • The survey conducted by the Flight Safety Foundation involved 1,444 individuals, including 1,404 pilots, to assess their reactions to grooved runways.
  • Grooved runways significantly enhance safety for high-speed general aviation aircraft by reducing hydroplaning and improving braking action in wet conditions.
  • Pilots operating light, low-speed aircraft generally did not perceive the benefits of grooved runways due to their operational requirements being easily met by existing runway lengths and widths.
  • All interviewed pilots believed that grooving had no detrimental effects on aircraft operations, including noise, vibration, tire wear, or damage.
  • The study found that corporate jet pilots and supplemental airline pilots provided the most informative feedback regarding the safety contributions of grooved runways.
Frequently asked questions
What was the purpose of the survey conducted by the Flight Safety Foundation?

The survey aimed to determine general aviation pilots' reactions and opinions on the effectiveness of runway grooving in improving braking action, directional control, and visibility during wet conditions.

How many pilots participated in the survey?

A total of 1,404 pilots were contacted during the survey, although 700 provided insufficient information for analysis.

What are the benefits of grooved runways according to the survey?

The survey results indicated that grooved runways provide increased safety for high-speed general aviation aircraft by reducing hydroplaning and enhancing braking performance in wet conditions.

Did pilots report any negative effects of grooved runways?

No, all interviewed pilots stated that grooving had no detrimental effects on aircraft operations, including aspects such as noise, vibration, tire wear, or damage.

Which airports were included in the study for grooved runways?

The study included four major civil airports: John F. Kennedy International, Washington National, Chicago Midway, and Kansas City Municipal, each having one or more grooved runways.

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX A CORRELATION OF ANSWERS FROM QUESTIONNAIRE

Section 2

PART I , PILOT Q.UESTIONNAIRES Question #1 Have you experienced hydroplaning or poor braking on a wet .or slushy runway?

Yes N o - Wet - Slushy:, , No of times

NUMBER OF PILOTS PI.STON , , TUR,BO-PROP, , ,JET , .T,OTAL YES 361 93 177 631

--

NO 72 1 73 93 177 625 WET 3 59 SLUSHY 151 55 98 304 34 57 287 0 m : Several 120 42 95 257 at 17 25 87 45 Many 8’ 0 - t i Z H Q u e s t i o n s # 2 and 3 H a v e you heard of R u n w a y G r o o v i n g ?

Y e s , , , , , , N o - A r e you a w a r e t h a t r u n w a y ,/ is grooved? Y e s N o _ _ I - NUMBER OF P I L O T S P1,STON . . , TURBO.-PROP . , ,JET TOTAL Q u e s t i o n YES 406 91 1.77 6 74 TWO NO 27 2 1 30 TOTAL 433 93 178 704 Q u e s t i o n YES 336 67 138 541 T h r e e NO 97 26 40 163 TOTAL 433 93 178 704 Q u e s t i o n #4 How d i d you acquire t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n ?

Tower A d v i s o r y F e l t V i b r a t i o n S a w G r o o v e s N o i s e , , O t h e r NUMBER OF P I L O T S , . P I S T O N , , , TURBO.-PR,OP J E T TOTAL 20 50 TOWER ADVISORY 23 7 77 330 OBSERVATION 206 47 8 51 CONVERSATION 34 9 104 347 PUBLICATIONS 188 55 48 11 23 82 OTHER TOTAL* 499 129 232 86 0 *A p i l o t niay acquire i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m m o r e than one source.

Question #5 Have you landed on runway . , ,- ,/ prior to , , /. / How many times Wet D r Y NUMBER OF PILOTS RUNWAY DCA. , , , MDY , MKC JFK TOTAL YES 182 199 157 9 629 NO 10 8 39 18 75 F E W 19 24 16 6 65 SEVERAL 51 25 64 36 176 MANY 112 150 77 49 388 141 85 551 WET 154 171 151 90 596 DRY 172 183 Q u e s t i o n #6 Have you l a n d e d on runway , . / s i n c e i t was g r o o v e d ?

, I f y e s , how many t i m e s ? Under what c o n d i t i o n s ?

Dry W e t S l u s h y NUMBER OF PILOTS PI STON TURBO-PROP, J E T TOTAL YES 417 92 177 6 86 NO 1 6 1 1 18 w F E W 10 2 31 78 211 0 u ) ~ SEVERAL 1 6 1 44 6 2 26 7 a . E MANY 1 5 4 17 37 208 0 . I 4 Z E El’ 3 , O 2 96 66 146 508 WET m -I4 SLUSHY 6 1 15 5 81 z: s a E d u Q u e s t i o n #7 Have you landed on o t h e r grooved runways? Y e s , , No Under what c o n d i t i o n s ? W e t , D r y S l u s h y I f y e s , where? . , No.of t i m e s NUMBER OF PILOTS

PI STON I TURBO-PROP,, . , JET TOTAL

3 56 49 75 4 80 NO 77 44 103 2 24 YES WET 53 25 72 150 DRY 6 1 40 93 194 SLUSHY 4 4 8 JFK 1 9 1 7 30 66 MDY 20 20 4 1 81 DCA 37 20 54 111 MKC 1 2 7 7 26 F E W 32 21 45 98 SEVERAL 23 2 1 45 MANY 20 2 10 Q u e s t i o n #8 P a r t 1. Did you n o t i c e a n y improvement l a n d i n g on a grooved runway i n : Braking Action? Y e s NO W e t , Slushy L _ - P a r t 2. Crosswind D i r e c t i o n a l C o n t r o l ? Y e s No W e t Dry-

_II- -

P a r t 3.

Reducing Landing/Takeoff R o l l ? Y e s -- N o Wet - Dry-

Part 4. V i s i b i l i t y During Reverse T h r u s t ? Y e s NO P a r t 5. S e e i n g t h e Runway During Approaches?

NUMBER OF PILOTS , , P,ISTON TURBO-PROP JET, TOTAL PART 1* YES 239 69 153 46 1 W E T 80 1 5 59 154 DRY 32 6 16 54 NO 194 24 25 243 PART 2 YES 130 47 108 285 WET 40 10 52 102 DRY 1 7 3 14 34 NO 249 39 54 342 NOT SURE 54 7 16 77 PART 3 YES 149 47 119 315 WET 53 10 52 115 DRY 24 3 1 7 44 .NO 218 33 34 285 NOT SURE 66 13 2 5 104

PART 4

Q u e s t i o n #8 ( C o n t i n u e d ) NUMBER OF P I L O T S PI STON . TJJRB.O,-PROP , , . , ,JET , , TOTAL PART 4 YES 2 22 32 56 NO 48 19 61 128 NOT SURE 383 52 85 520 PART 5* 77 2 17 DAY/YES 109 31 VFR/NO 324 62 101 487 PART 6* DAY/YES 85 30 76 191 IFR/NO 348 63 102 513 PART 7* NIGHT/YES 58 29 69 156 VFR/NO 375 64 109 548 PART 8* N I GHT/YE S , 33 68 12 8 I FR/NO 400 66 110 576 *The answer " N o t S u r e / N o Comment'' was considered n e g a t i v e .

Q u e s t i o n #9 I n your o p i n i o n , do y o u - t h i n k Runway Grooving h e l p s you t o o p e r a t e your a i r c r a f t more s a f e l y ?

Yes N o NTJMBER OF P I L O T S P,I STON TURBO- PROP J E T TOTAL YES 374 90 164 628 2 40 NO 37 1 2 12 36 NOT SURE 22 93 178 704 TOTAL 433 Question #10 Do you recommend grooving f o r a l l runways? Y e s . , No NUMBER OF P I L O T S ,PISTON , TURBO-PROP , ,JET, TOTAL YES 3 86 89 171 6 46

--

NO 22 1 23 NO OPINION 25 4 6 35 TOTAL 433 93 178 704

PART 11, TOWER PERSONN+ QUEST1,ONNAIRE

BASIC QUESTIONNAIRE DATA PART 11, TOWER PERSONN+ QUEST1,ONNAIRE Q u e s t i o n #1 Do you n o t i c e a n y r e d u c t i o n i n t h e size s p r a y p a t t e r n s of a i r c r a f t o p e r a t i n g o n grooved runways v e r s u s t h o s e n o t grooved?

Y e s N o , , D e s c r i b e : C o n s i d e r a b l e Some L i t t l e AIRPORT CONTROL TOWER SPECIALIST D.C. CHICAGO NEW YORK A I RPORT KANSAS NATIONAL MIDWAY KENNEDY TOTAL PERCENT* 3 0 2 1 58.3 YES 10 8 0 2 2 11 15 41.7 NO 9 2 3 0 14 38.9 CONSIDERABLE 1 2 0 0 3 8.3 SOME 0 4 0 0 4 11.1 LITTLE 0 2 2 11 15 41.7 NONE *Of t o t a l tower personnel (36) i n t e r v i e w e d .

Q u e s t i o n #2 Do you n o t i c e any s i g n i f i c a n t improvement i n runway t r a f f i c management d u r i n g a d v e r s e c o n d i t i o n s o n grooved runways?

Y e s , . , NO D e s c r i b e : C o n s i d e r a b l e . , , . , Some L i t t l e AIRPORT CONTROL TOWER SPECIALIST D.C. CHICAGO NEW PORK A I RPORT KANSAS NATIONAL . MIDWAY, KENNEDY TOTAL PERCENT* 24 6 6 . 7 YES 10 9 3 2 12 33.3 NO 0 1 2 9 7 6 2 0 15 41.7 CONSIDERABLE 3 1 1 2 7 1 9 . 4 SOME 0 2 0 0 2 5.6 LITTLE 0 1 2 9 12 33.3 NONE *Of t o t a l tower p e r s o n n e l (36) i n t e r v i e w e d .

26 '

NASA-Langley, 1969 - 2 CR-1428

Source & rights

Source: ntrs.nasa.gov. Public-domain U.S. Government work (17 USC §105) — freely reproducible.

Permanent URL — we don’t break links.

Report a problem or request removal

Document details

Doc number
·
19690026483
Publisher
·
NASA
Year
·
1969
Pages
·
29
File size
·
9.0 MB
Chapters
·
4