Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Abstract
The September 11 attacks in the US brought mixed fortunes to the safety of the aviation industry because over the years, the world has witnessed increased aggression by terrorists and other criminals in launching airport attacks. Even though terrorism is a big threat to the safety of commercial airports, the scope of this paper transcends terrorist threats to include other aspects of safety in the operation of commercial airports. Some of these aspects include the building of residential and commercial buildings (in and around airports), runway incursions, runway excursions and bird strikes (among other natural disasters that may pose a risk to the safety of commercial airports). These are the existent security threats identified in most commercial airports around the world. Based on these security threats, this paper questions the usefulness of traditional safety considerations for commercial airports. Instead, this paper proposes new methods of improving the safety of commercial airports by recognizing the diversity of airport threats and the need for integrating human inputs into safety management systems. However, this paper recognizes the need to maintain traditional security measures but it also challenges the relevant authorities to improve such systems by incorporating new security measures that can deter present-day criminals. The realization of improved safety in our airports therefore warrants a renewed focus on how we perceive airport security threats.
Introduction
Flying is the safest mode of transport (Gladwell 2001, p. 53). This statement characterizes the airline safety perception among most travelers. From, this statement, undoubtedly, the level of safety in the transport industry is a crucial factor to consider while making the decision to determine which mode of transport to use. Though there is a common perception among many observers that airline transport is the safest form of transport, few people know the extremes that airline personnel have to undergo to ensure the industry remains safe (Wiener 1988, p. 433). However, many people are involved in ensuring that airline transport is safe. They include, flight engineers, pilots, airline manufacturing companies, commercial airline companies and air traffic organizations. These institutions are mandated to ensure the airline industry remains safe and newer methods of airline safety control are properly integrated into existing safety systems.
The commitment to ensure airline safety is normally evident in different aspects of airline traffic control including aircraft design, avionics, engine design, and system designs. However, airline safety is also extended to less-known aspects of safe operations such as airport designs, and dimensional standards (National Research Council 2007, p. 1). Safety is therefore an integral part of the operations in the airline sector and it may manifest in different forms, including standard operating procedures, adoption of new technology and ensuring that safety is the driving force behind airport operations (Parasuraman 1996, p. 91). The Airports Council International (ACI) believes that safety in the airline industry is not only defined by what the industry is but what is done (on a daily basis) to ensure air traffic safety (National Research Council 2007).
Since the aviation industry is a dynamic and multifaceted industry, many people ponder what airport security entails. Rome (2010) explains that, airport security refers to the security and techniques used to protect airports and aircrafts from crime (p. 73). Indeed, alongside seaports, railways and roads, airports witness large volumes of human traffic. Due to the sheer volumes of people within this transport terminus, airports remain a prime target for crimes such as terrorism. Furthermore, due to the high concentration of people within one aircraft, many terrorists perceive aircrafts to be a prime lethal weapon and target for their operations (Davies 1982). Indeed, the September 11 attack in the US is a prime example of how terrorists have targeted airports and aircrafts to launch their attacks. The world has witnessed other terrorist attacks such as the 1976 Cubana flight 455 which was shot down by terrorists (Marks 2010). This attack claimed 73 lives. Among other fatal attacks, which were caused by a lapse in airport security is the death of nearly 400 people which was realized after Air India (flight 182) was bombed by terrorists. The attack happened after airport officials failed to detect a bomb that was planted on the flight. The attack happened in 1985 (National Research Council 2007). The year 1994, also played host to another airport attack on Philippines Airlines (flight 434) that caused the death of one person after airport security detected the threat and foiled the attack before any more casualties were reported (National Research Council 2007). In 1972, three members of the Japanese Red Army launched an indiscriminate attack on civilians at an airport by firing at civilians and throwing grenades at innocent people (National Research Council 2007). The three assailants were later contained by airport officials (but after killing 24 people). Rome and Vienna airports also played host to similar attacks after unknown gunmen opened fire at innocent civilians on the airport terminus. The attack saw close to a dozen people dead (National Research Council 2007). In 2002, a similar attack was reported at a Los Angeles airport. The assault resulted in the death of two people (National Research Council 2007).
From the history of airport attacks, airport authorities have always been on high alert to avert any terrorist attacks. Such cautiousness has seen several airport attacks averted. For example, in 2006, British authorities detected a terrorist plot targeted at bombing aircrafts originating from the US and UK and averted the same (National Research Council 2007). This terrorist threat accounted for the first red alert in the US.
To many aviation authorities, airport security may amount to different things. However, to common people, airport security involves the provision of measures that protect people from grave harm. Across the globe, drug seizures and the trafficking of human beings has also been reported as a real threat to airport security (National Research Council 2007). In addition, the trafficking of illegal goods across airports is one such aspect of airport security that most people perceive to be important in airport security management. The perpetrators of such activities are often attracted to airports because of their accessibility to other countries. Airports are also targeted transit points for illegal goods such as ivory, and drugs. Smugglers are known to use airports for transmitting illegal goods across continents, thereby contravening international laws governing the same. These illegal goods may cause grave human harm if their trade is left to flourish. However, most importantly, if this trade is allowed to go on, it amounts to great airport security contravention. Aside from this fact, the biggest danger associated with illegal trade across airports is the fact that such illegal traders are often dangerous and they do not care about the wellbeing of other people (House of Commons 2010). Therefore, such criminals may pose a threat to the security of airport officials and by extension, the public.
Despite the surge in terrorist attacks and other forms of airports security violations, air traffic volumes are still set to increase in the coming decades. For instance, in the next two decades aircraft manufacturers estimate that air traffic is expected to grow by nearly 168% (House of Commons 2010). The growth in passenger numbers during the same period is estimated at 5%. Currently, the US department of homeland security estimates that about 730 million people use airport services every year and nearly the same number of people has their luggage checked for items that contravene airport security rules (annually) (House of Commons 2010). Airports are just a small part of the factors leading to an infringement of air traffic safety. For example, a recent survey by Burke (2008) shows that about 30% of all air traffic accidents involved an oversight of one aspect of airport safety. However, airports are complicated areas of operations because there are some factors in the airport environment, which may not necessarily be within the control of airport authorities. Such issues may include the weather, inadequate air safety guidance (and the likes). Therefore, many causal factors may cause a lapse in airport safety. Some researchers such as Burke (2008) estimate these causal factors to be more than 70 but the House of Commons (2010) groups these factors into seven categories including, lighting and marking, runways and taxiways issues, information issues, external hazards, apron and ramp issues, ATC operations and procedures issues, and aerodrome issues. The sheer size of airport related issues highlights the importance of all stakeholders in the maintenance of airport security to work together.
Nonetheless, the main problem associated with the understanding of airport security is the lack of proper data collection and data synchrony among different airports in the world. For example, there is poor quality of information regarding which airport security problems originate from ground operations and which ones originate from maintenance operations. Within the same sphere of understanding, Burke (2008) explains that, Within the accident information which is being collected, a general lack of attention to the organizational factors and corporate culture factors in data collection taxonomies is present which further impedes deeper insight (p. 45). The poor focus of organizational structures and corporate cultures (as impediments to understanding airport security) has however not been witnessed in all parts of the world. There are some statistics, which show the main causes of airport security lapses such as recent reports by the European accident investigations, which highlight the different lapses in safety system information among various airport safety institutions as another barrier to understanding airport security (Harris 2002, p. 1). For example, the 1995 Daventry accident and the 1991 Edinburgh accidents were mainly attributed to poor maintenance and poor handling of ground operations (Harris 2002, p. 1).
Understanding the importance of airport safety in todays multifunctional society is therefore gaining increased importance, especially with increased emphasis on non-traditional concerns such as environmental factors. For instance, there is reduced public tolerance to environmental effects of airport activities and third party casualties associated with poor air traffic controls (Harris 2002, p. 1). These new and emerging trends are further piling up more pressure to airport authority officials to maintain high safety standards through integrating new technology and coming up with innovative ways of tackling airport security issues (Rasmussen 1986). However, airport authorities are still expected to meet the growing capacity issues and environmental concerns associated with air traffic operations. From this growing complexity of operations, there is increased attention to the fact that safety is no longer perceived to be an objective in airport operations but rather a constraint (Harris 2002, p. 6). To complicate further the situation, new hazards are slowly emerging and the existing ones are becoming more difficult to manage (especially with the changing technology).
There is a growing emphasis on third party risk as another important factor in all airport safety considerations because airports attract huge volumes of human traffic and people who live close to these facilities suffers an involuntary risk of living next to airports. Even though there is a low probability of air traffic accidents occurring (like one in a million), the local risk level associated with air traffic disasters is significant. Concerning this observation, Price (2008) reports that, The resulting annual probability of an accident at a typical large airport is therefore much greater than the small probability of being involved in an aircraft accident as a passenger (p. 23). Furthermore, Price (2008) explains that air traffic accidents normally occur within the vicinity of the airports (during take-offs and landings).
Based on the above understanding, airports need to have strong safety measures to mitigate any risk of an accident. It is therefore important to uphold airport security to prevent the occurrence of airport attacks and uphold the high safety standards associated with industry. The effectiveness of guaranteeing high safety standards within our airports will therefore ensure that there is reduced crime, reduced terrorism and reduced instances of illegal trade within our borders. The importance of airport security can therefore not be underestimated because it serves different purposes including protecting the airport and country from any threatening events, to reassure the traveling public that they are safe and to protect the country and their people (House of Commons 2010, p, 3). The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration also emphasizes this point by asserting that, The goal of aviation security is to prevent harm to aircraft, passengers, and crew, as well as support national security and counter-terrorism policy (Burke 2008, p. 23).
This paper seeks to investigate the safety considerations for a commercial airport based on the current security threats that face modern airports today. To have a correct conceptualization of the research problem, this paper will be categorized into five sections. The literature review will be relied on to provide a proper model framework for analyzing the research problem. Here, the works of previous researchers will be evaluated to establish what other people have written regarding the research topic. The next section will be the research methodology, which will elaborate how the findings of the study were arrived at. This will be a thought out account of how the findings of the study were reached and why some of the research tools were used. The final section of this paper will be the conclusion section. This section will reinforce the findings of the study and open the outcomes to more scrutiny.
Literature Review
Safety considerations for a commercial airport have been analyzed from different angles. One aspect that has been evaluated by many researchers is the policy aspect of safety consideration for airport designs and operations (Harris 2002, p. 6). Different countries have different policies, but lately, most of these policies have been harmonized to international safety standards. Such standards have been developed by different organizations including the United Nations International Civil Aviation organization (ICAO) which was formed to regulate air traffic operations around the world (Harris 2002, p. 6). The formation of such organizations and policies started after the Second World War where airports started to report huge volumes of commercial air traffic. This period also characterized the evolution of aircrafts from small propeller driven machines to large aircrafts that can travel halfway around the world and carry more than 500 people in the same trip (Wittes 2009). Throughout this transition, air travel has not been as dangerous as other forms of transport. Partly, the main fact that has led to this observation is the formulation of common standards for aerodrome design. Wittes (2009) explains that, Todays ICAO Annex 14, dealing with Aerodrome Design and Operations, is a comprehensive document covering standards and recommended practices for aerodrome physical characteristics, obstacle restrictions, visual aids, electrical systems, aerodrome services and maintenance (p. 33). From the above assertion, Wittes (2009) notes that policy provisions have ensured that different aspects of airport design are safe. Furthermore, most of these policy provisions are renewed annually to ensure they cover all aspects of airport safety (today).
The standards for operating procedures in different commercial airports around the world have also been harmonized to reduce the risk of accidents in airports. This is another safety measure identified by Harris (2002) as having contributed to increased safety standards in commercial airports today. In reference to this observation, Harris (2002) emphasizes that:
The introduction of standard operating procedures employed by airport operators, airlines, pilots, air traffic control organizations, as well as the companies that provide important services such as ground handling and re-fuelling, have played a very important role in airport safety (p. 5).
Through the above assertion, there is a common agreement among all stakeholders that safety precautions are often added to an already safe system by improving the standard operating procedures in commercial airports. The effectiveness of these procedural operating standards cannot be underestimated because they cover most aspects of an airports operations, including airfield operations, all operations at the apron and all sensitive areas in airport safety such as gates and maintenance warehouses (Harris 2002, p. 8). For instance, most airports around the world have a provision for the maximum speed that a car should be driven on the apron and the stipulated distance for vehicles driving behind aircrafts with running engines. Similar provisions also define the rules for crossing taxiways. In fact, many airports have more stringent rules for any vehicle driving in the runways or any contact that is to be made with the control tower (Harris 2002, p. 8).
Similar rules and procedures also apply for airport personnel who control aircrafts. These rules are usually meant to safeguard the personnel and the aircrafts (Vicente 2004). For instance, all personnel are normally required to wear earmuffs and visible jackets when they are on the airfield so that they are visible to the pilots. Moreover, airport personnel are usually required to stand at a safe distance from the aircraft. These rules and procedures are normally inculcated into the safety culture of the aviation industry during the training period of new personnel.
Training is another safety aspect that has been identified by many researchers such as Filipczak (1996) because they highlight this aspect of air traffic control to be important in maintaining airport safety. Vicente (2004) purports that, it is vital for a safety culture to be engrained from the top management downwards, including the notion of a just culture, whereby reporting of safety hazards and occurrences is encouraged, with the intention of learning from these events and discussing solutions, which leads to a continuous reduction in the rate of accidents (Vicente 2004, p. 3).
Many organizations are involved in training airport personnel on the right safety standards to adopt. Most of these organizations vary in different countries. However, the Airport Council International (ACI) is very vibrant (internationally) in the training of airport personnel and imparting new knowledge on various aspects of airport safety. Such training normally occurs in short courses such as the ACI Global Safety Network Course (Swezey 1992, p. 219). Concerning such courses, Howell (1989) explains that, Airport Staff can obtain the ACI Global Safety Network Diploma after the completion of the three modules on: safety management systems at aerodromes, airside safety and operations and emergency planning and crisis management (p. 121). Training is therefore perceived to be a critical aspect of airport safety because poorly trained personnel are more prone to making security errors (which may turn out to be fatal).
Technology, systems and equipment are perceived to be tools that can greatly improve airports safety if properly used and improved. More importantly, the adoption of new technology in airport safety has greatly improved airport safety standards around the world. Different areas, influencing airport safety (such as new lighting systems, precision approach and landings systems, surface movement radar, visual docking guidance systems, and automated meteorological systems) have greatly benefitted from improved systems and equipment. These airport control fields are just a few areas that have benefitted from the improvement of systems and equipment.
The greatest advantage of using systems and equipment in maintaining airport safety is that they can be improved often. The use of modern safety systems and equipment in fire fighting and rescue missions is testament to the evolution of technology in improving airport safety (Swezey 1992, p. 219). Over the decades, other systems and equipment (used in emergency and evacuation situations) have also been improved using new systems and equipment. However, the entire notion of improving safety measures is to reduce the reliance on emergency and evacuation systems. Nonetheless, though this fact stands, it does not demean the importance of using modern equipment and systems in emergency services. Rough weather conditions that are known to worsen airport safety are also mitigated using modern systems and equipment in air traffic control. For example, advanced surface movement guidance and control systems have been widely adopted in many airports as an advanced tool to guide pilots during night landing and in times of rough weather (Swezey 1992, p. 219). These systems work the same way as traffic lights because they act as a clearance for landing. There are ongoing efforts in research and development to devise new safety measures to be engrained on the airports cockpit so that pilots can know their aircrafts position on the airfield and where other vehicles or moving objects are located on the same platform. It is estimated that testing such systems will commence soon and such equipment should be available in the market sooner (Swezey 1992, p. 219).
Safety management systems have also been identified as important tools for the maintenance of a good safety environment in the airport. The safety management system is nothing more than a procedural and structural way of managing airport operations such as structures, accountabilities, policies, procedures and similar aspects of importance to airport operations. ICAO is normally known as the main oversight body for the implementation of safety management systems. It works by having a strong regard to local aviation regulations and international aviation regulations. For instance, since the year 2003, most airports around the world have been required to have a manual that stipulates how all equipment and procedures (used in the airport) work (Vicente 2004, p. 3). The safety management system has replaced an older type of safety precaution that relied on periodic audits to ensure airport safety procedures were upheld. In relation to the establishment of a safety management system, Vicente (2004) recommends that all airports should have a safety management committee that includes all stakeholders who control the operations of all airport departments (including the apron, taxiways and runways). Through the establishment of the safety management committee, airport accidents such as runway incursions can be prevented. Nonetheless, the establishment of a safety management system requires many safety assessments to be done within specific intervals of times. Within each safety assessment, a risk assessment is done to reduce or eliminate the possibility of an accident occurring. Aerodrome safety has been upheld in many airports in this way.
There are certain structural designs that have been pointed out by Vicente (2004) to be important in the reduction of airport accidents and the improvement of airport safety. One such improvement is the establishment of fewer crossings on the runways. This can be done by changing the layout and design of the airport. The establishment of perimeter taxiways is also another strategy that can be used to improve airport safety, although many airports around the world find this strategy to lack feasibility because of a lack of space.
The provision of safety guidance materials has also been identified by some researchers such as Vicente (2004) as being vital to the improvement of airport safety. Concerning this identification, Vicente (2004) says that, Industry guidance material has been produced on the elimination or reduction of major risks such as runway incursions, excursions and confusion (p. 34). Currently, many issues are being reviewed as part of important air safety precautions. For instance, runway excursions are being reviewed for the risk of poor braking or aircrafts deviating from the runway due to poor weather. There are even more concerns currently being expressed about the presence of runway debris on the aircraft pathways which may potentially cause aircraft accidents during take-offs and landing. Some of this debris can cause severe mechanical malfunctions such as the presence of stone-sized objects, which may be sucked into aircraft engines (thereby causing mechanical failure). Similar objects may also be sucked into an aircrafts fuel tank, thereby blocking the fuel pathway. In Chicago, OHare airport has been identified to suffer such security risks because litter, rocks and unwanted materials are identified to characterize the airports environ (thereby posing a strong security threat to the aircrafts that land or take-off from the facility) (Airport Internationals US Correspondent 2009, p. 1). Most of these litter and unwanted materials were left on the airport during the construction of the taxiways and the expansion of the runways. Referring to the runway debris at O hare airport, Airport Internationals US Correspondent (2009) explains that:
The construction materials were found lying on demarcated runway safety areas at the ends of the airports newest runway and this concerned the debris found on the runways themselves: these safety areas being used in the event of emergency aircraft take offs or landings (p. 14).
At the same airport, there were other security threats on the runway, which emanated from the authorization to use airport facilities without properly training airport employees on the same (Guzzo 1988, p. 63). For example, some airport officials drove around undesignated areas of O Hare airport because they were not trained to properly use airport facilities.
Like runway excursions, runway incursions have also been identified as a real security threat to airport operations. A recent report detailing the risks of runway incursions and excursions have painted a grim picture on airport security by highlighting that passengers are often safer when they are airborne than when they are on the ground (Consumer Affairs 2009, p. 1). Partly, this security risk is attributed to runway incursions, which is identified by Consumer Affairs (2009) as any incident involving an unauthorized aircraft, vehicle, or person on a runway (p. 1). Over the years spanning the 2000s period, incidents of runway incursions have been on the rise. The year 2004 alone played host to a 38% increase in runway incursions in America (Consumer Affairs 2009, p. 1). Again, in 2008, more than 24 serious runway incursions were reported in the US. Some of these incidents were mere accidents brought about by poor weather while others were caused by negligence and other human errors (Reason 1990). In the US alone, several airports have been identified as bearing the greatest threats to runway incursions and excursions. These airports are located in Baltimore; Boston; Charlotte, North Carolina; Chicago; Fort Lauderdale, Florida; Los Angeles, New York City, Philadelphia; Phoenix; San Francisco; and Washington, D.C (Consumer Affairs 2009, p. 1). In 2005, an incident of airport incursion was reported at Chicago midway when an aircraft skid off the runway (due to bad weather), thereby causing four fatalities and 18 injuries. In California, another incident involving a jetliner flight which was trying to land at Bob Hope airport caused more than 44 injuries when it skid off the runway due to a lack of enough safety zones on the highway (Consumer Affairs 2009, p. 1). Due to such safety concerns, the FAA has listed more than 1000 airports in the US alone for not complying with the stipulated safety zone procedures. About a quarter of the listed cases are said to pose big threats to the safety of the passengers (Consumer Affairs 2009, p. 1).
However, concerning runway excursions and incursions as possible security threats, there are specific physical and training measures that have been taken to reduce such risks. Some countries are warming up to the challenges of such eventualities. For example, some nations are building longer runways (more than the recommended) to internally mitigate the risk posed by runway excursions. The establishment of an arrestor bed at the end of the runway is also another measure taken by airports to prevent runway excursions (Consumer Affairs 2009, p. 1). These risk mitigation measures are however done within the provision of ICAO regulations. Many airport authorities are further exploiting the possibility of mitigating other risks such as runway confusion and wrong runway operations .
However, the above measures are identified to (still) be insufficient at curbing all the possible threats to airport security. For example, there are other threats identified by Consumer Affairs (2009) concerning the location of certain international airports around wetlands and trees as another issue that greatly contravenes airport security because such environments attract animals and other living creatures to inhabit airport environs. Bird strikes are the greatest threat to airport security emanating from the close proximity of airports to wetlands, grasslands and forested lands. In fact, many airport officials facing this threat perceive the threat of bird strikes to be omnipresent. Airport threats of this nature have been reported in many parts of the world, with the most recent (and notable) airport security threat detected involving a flight take-off from New Yorks LaGuardia Airport in 2009 (Consumer Affairs 2009, p. 1). Hundreds of geese, which were wandering on the runway, obstructed the flight take-off. However, there were no deaths reported (Consumer Affairs 2009, p. 1).
Many aviation authorities such as the US federal Aviation Administration (FAA) have stressed the importance of airport authorities to mitigate the risk of bird strikes because airfields should not have any form of floating debris around their vicinity (Wagner 2012, p. 1). Nonetheless, not many airports around the world comply with set regulations regarding the topography of airport environs. For instance, few airports comply with the provision that grasslands surrounding the airports should not be more than six inches long. In addition, fewer airports comply with the regulation requiring all paved surfaces around airports to be free from all forms of vegetation.
The development of residential homes around airports has also been identified as another issue contravening airport security in many parts of the world (McNeil 2010, p. 1). Growing human populations in major urban centers around the world has exacerbated this problem. This increase in population has consequently led to a surge in housing developments, which have created more pressure to use idle airport land. Some of these developments have been necessitated by the growing pressure among investors to build commercial centers around airports to take advantage of the immense business opportunities, which exists from airport services. Such establishments include hotels, restaurants, recreational facilities and the likes. Due to these factors, pilots have been forced to fly dangerously close to residential and commercial establishments built around airports.
The danger posed by the establishment of residential and commercial buildings next to airports is increased by the threat o
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.