Navigational aids and aviation services special study

              NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION
SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY
f
|
!
i
AERONAUTICS DIVISION
November 1998
!/
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The preparation of the Navigational Aids and Aviation Services Special Study
incorporated input from the aviation public and private sectors as members of a
Project Advisory Committee and through the course of pilot information
meetings. Those participating as member of the Committee are listed below.
The insight they provided from their industry perspectives to the formulation of
the Study recommendations is greatly appreciated.
Project Advisory Committee
Wayland Adams, Honeywell Commuter Aviation
Roger Carlin, Helicopters Association International
Michael Covalt, Arizona Airports Association
Richard Dawson, AIREvac
Dean Fish, Sawyer Aviation
Chad Haring, Allied Signal Engines
Stacy Howard, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association
Sean Jeralds, Embry- Riddle Aeronautical University
Denis Kelleher, Honeywell Commuter Aviation
Michael Lewis, Mesa Airlines
Skip Paschke, FAA Phoenix TRACON
Darrell Purcell, Arizona Airports Association
Arvin Schultz, " Arizona Flyways"
James Timm, Arizona Pilots Association
Harry Wolfe, Maricopa Association of Governments
QED and ADOT Aeronautics also wish to recognize those pilots who attended
the briefing meetings for their input. These combined outreach efforts served to
enhance the Study and establish a basis from which future improvements to the
Arizona system of airports can be implemented.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
QED Airport & Aviation Consultants
November 30, 1998
Mr. Gary Adams
Director
Arizona Department of Transportation
Aeronautics Division
1833 West Buchanan Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85007- 3335
Dear Mr. Adams:
QED is pleased to submit the Navigational Aids and Aviation Services Special Study.
The Study represents many months of intensive evaluation, documentation, review and discussion
among the participants in the effort. Special recognition should be given to the contributions of
the members of the project advisory committee and the staff of the Aeronautics Division.
We trust that this document will serve as a working guideline for implementation of instrument
approach procedures, visual landing aids, communications, weather facilities and aviation
services to enhance flight safety in Arizona. The benefits of these facilities and services will
be enjoyed by users of the airport and aviation system as well as potentially other segments of
the Arizona public and private economies.
We are pleased to have had this opportunity to assist the Division in this progressive effort.
Sincerely,
Ronald F. Price, P. E.
Principal
RFP/ pss
Enclosure
16 Banks Hill Place P. O. Box 174 Ridgefield, Connecticut 06877 Telephone/ Facsimile 203.438.2520
l/
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
ES
1
2
3
4
Executive Summary ...................................................................... ES- 1
Introduction ..................................................................................... 1- 1
Existing System Facilities .............................................................. 2- 1
Introduction ....................................................................................... 2- 1
NAVAIDS, VlSAIDS and Communications ........................................ 2- 1
Air Traffic Control Radar Coverage ................................................. 2- 28
Aviation Weather ............................................................................. 2- 29
METAR Dissemination .................................................................... 2- 38
Weather Radar ..................... : .......................................................... 2- 39
AFSS / FSS Services ...................................................................... 2- 43
Commercial Vendor Services .......................................................... 2- 43
Communications Facilities .............................................................. 2- 44
Forecasts of Aviation Demand ....................................................... 3- 1
Introduction ....................................................................................... 3- 1
Socioeconomic Characteristics ......................................................... 3- 1
Registered Pilots ............................................................................... 3- 2
Registered Aircraft ............................................................................ 3- 8
General Aviation Activity ................................................................. 3- 10
IFR Peak- Hour Aircraft Operations ................................................. 3- 16
IFR Peak- Hour Capacity ................................................................. 3- 16
Technological Assessment ............................................................ 4- 1
Introduction ....................................................................................... 4- 1
Navigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4- 1
Communications ............................................................................... 4- 8
Surveillance ....................................................................................... 4- 9
Flight Services ................................................................................. 4- 10
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
6
7
8
9
10
Chapter
5
Page
Instrument Approach Procedures Analysis ................................. 5- 1
Introduction ....................................................................................... 5- 1
Existing Instrument Approach Procedures ........................................ 5- 1
Desired Instrument Approach Capability ......................................... 5- 11
GPS Analysis .................................................................................. 5- 22
GPS Analysis Findings .................................................................... 5- 23
Benefit / Cost Assessment .............................................................. 5- 47
Airport System Services .................................................................. 5- 54
GPS Approach Recommendations ................................................. 5- 57
Differential GPS .............................................................................. 5- 79
Instrument Approach Training ......................................................... 5- 79
VISAID Facility Requirements ........................................................ 6- 1
Weather Facility Requirements ...................................................... 7- 1
Introduction ....................................................................................... 7- 1
AWOS Requirements ........................................................................ 7- 1
Broadcast ........................................................................................ 7- 23
AWOS- 3 Upgrades ......................................................................... 7- 24
Remote Communications Outlet Requirements ........................... 8- 1
Aviation Services Assessment ...................................................... 9- 1
Introduction ....................................................................................... 9- 1
Service Needs That Are Being Met ................................................... 9- 1
Service Needs That Are Not Being Met ............................................ 9- 2
Potential ADOT Aeronautics Initiatives ............................................. 9- 4
Weather Data Network .................................................................. 10- 1
Introduction ..................................................................................... 10- 1
Conceptual Network ........................................................................ 10- 1
Recommended AWOS Network Topology ...................................... 10- 2
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
Chapter Page
11 Implementation Program .............................................................. 11- 1
Introduction ..................................................................................... 11- 1
GPS Approach Procedures ............................................................. 11- 2
AWOS Facilities .............................................................................. 11- 8
Weather Center ............................................................................... 11- 8
VlSAIDS ........................................................................................ 11- 8
GCO Facilities ............................................................................... 11- 11
Establishment and Operating Costs .............................................. 11- 11
Funding Options ............................................................................ 11- 21
Maintenance Costs ....................................................................... 11- 23
Telecommunications Costs ........................................................... 11- 23
State Versus Contract Management ............................................. 11- 26
Public Versus Private Funding Participation ................................. 11- 27
Appendix
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
Glossary .......................................................................................... A- 1
General Aviation Pilot Survey ........................................................ B- 1
Airport Owner / Sponsor Survey .................................................... C- 1
Fixed Base Operator / Tenant Survey ........................................... D- 1
Weather Information Use Survey ................................................... E- 1
Automated Weather Facilities ........................................................ F- 1
Project Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes ............................. G- 1
Pilot Information Meetings ............................................................. H- 1
Table
2- 1
2- 2
2- 3
2- 4
2- 5
2- 6
2- 7
3- 1
3- 2
3- 3
Existing Facilities Summary-
Terminal NAVAIDS and VlSAIDS ............................................. 2- 4- 15
Existing Facilities Summary -
Weather Facilities and Communications Outlets ..................... 2- 16- 24
Existing Off- Airport NAVAIDS and
Communications Outlets ......................................................... 2- 25- 27
Manned Weather Observation Sites ............................................... 2- 31
ASOS Service Standard Levels ( C and D) and ( A and B) .......... 2- 35- 36
AWOS Levels and Reports ............................................................. 2- 37
Existing Weather Radar Facilities ................................................... 2- 40
Registered General Aviation Pilots ................................................... 3- 4
Registered Commercial Pilots ........................................................... 3- 5
Registered Airline Transport Pilots .................................................... 3- 6
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
II1
Table Page
3- 4
3- 5
3- 6
3- 7
5- 1
5- 2
5- 3
5- 4
5- 5
5- 6
5- 7
6- 1
6- 2
7- 1
7- 2
7- 3
11- 1
11- 2
11- 3
11- 4
11- 5
11- 6
11- 7
11- 8
11- 9
11- 10
11- 11
11- 12
11- 13
Total Registered Pilots ...................................................................... 3- 7
Total Registered Aircraft ................................................................... 3- 9
General Aviation Aircraft Operations .......................................... 3- 11- 15
IFR Peak- Hour Demand / Capacity ............................................ 3- 17- 19
Existing Instrument Approach Procedures ................................... 5- 3- 10
Desired / Target Instrument Approach Capability ...................... 5- 13- 21
Initial GPS Analysis .................................................................... 5- 25- 40
Initial GPS Analysis Grouping .................................................... 5- 44- 46
Benefit / Cost Assessment for Selected Airports ........................ 5- 50- 53
Final GPS Analysis .................................................................... 5- 58- 71
Summary of Final GPS Analysis ................................................ 5- 73- 75
Minimum Guidelines for Visual Landing Aids -
Primary Runway ............................................................................. 6- 2
VlSAID Facility Requirements - Primary Runway .......................... 6- 3- 8
AWOS / ASOS Backbone System .................................................... 7- 6
AWOS Scenario 1 ........................................................................... 7- 10
Final AWOS Requirements .............................................................. 7- 20
GPS Approaches Staging Program - Initial Stage ( Years 1- 4) ........ 11- 5
GPS Approaches Staging Program-
Intermediate Stage ( Years 5- 7) .................................................... 11- 6
GPS Approaches Staging Program - Final Stage ( Years 8- 10) ...... 11- 7
AWOS Facilities Staging Program - Initial Stage ( Years 1- 4) ......... 11- 9
AWOS Facilities Staging Program -
Intermediate Stage ( Years 5- 7) and Final Stage ( Years 8- 10)... 11- 10
Unit Establishment and Annual Maintenance Costs ..................... 11- 13
Staged Establishment and Annual Costs ...................................... 11- 14
System Airport Facility Establishment Costs ............................ 11- 15- 21
Funding Participation Scenarios ................................................... 11- 24
Establishment Funding Sources Scenarios .................................. 11- 25
Weather Center Organization - Public Sector Option .................... 11- 28
Weather Center Organization - Private Sector Option .................. 11- 29
Weather Center Organization -
Public / Private Partnership Option ............................................ 11- 30
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
IV
Figure Page
2- 1
2- 2
5- 1
5- 2
7- 1
7- 2
7- 3
7- 4
7- 5
7- 6
10- 1
Existing Weather Observation Sites ................................................ 2- 33
Existing NEXRAD Weather Radar Coverage .................................. 2- 41
Existing System Area Coverage - ½ - Mile Visibility Minimum .......... 5- 55
Final System Area Coverage - ½ - Mile Visibility Minimum ............... 5- 77
AWOS / ASOS Backbone System .................................................... 7- 7
AWOS Scenario 1 - Backbone and AWOS- 3' s with
Benefit / Cost ___ 1.0 ......................................................................... 7- 11
AWOS Scenario 2 - AWOS Scenario 1 and Strategic AWOS- 3
Locations at lAP Airports ................................................................. 7- 13
AWOS Scenario 3 - AWOS Scenario 2 and AWOS- 3' s for
Increased Coverage ........................................................................ 7- 17
Final AWOS Requirements ............................................................. 7- 21
AWOS- 4 Locations- Potential Upgrade ........................................... 7- 25
AWOS Weather Network Concept .................................................. 10- 5
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
V
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
The Arizona Department of Transportation ( ADOT), Aeronautics Division has
prepared the Navigational Aids and Aviation Services Special Study to provide
guidance in the development of the Arizona Primary and Secondary system of
95 airports with regard to instrument approaches, visual landing aids,
communications, weather and aviation services. A project advisory committee
representing pilot, airport management and aviation system users participated in
the development of the Study findings, priorities and recommendations. Pilot
information meetings were also conducted in Flagstaff, Phoenix and Tucson to
present preliminary findings and obtain user input.
Study Basis
A primary objective of the Study is to identify improvements to the Arizona
system of airports that have technical, practical and financial merit. This is
accomplished by balancing facility improvements with the system's ability to
accommodate them in an economically viable fashion. Use of operational and
performance evaluation criteria and benefit/ cost analyses, tempered with
consideration of system objectives, allows for such assessments. For example,
to address the need for improved instrument approach capability, application of
global positioning system ( GPS) technology is emphasized. GPS, in most
instances, does not require the installation of ground facilities. However, the
airport's physical layout with respect to compliance with applicable design
standards may limit its ability to achieve a new or improved instrument approach
in terms of lower minimums. The cost to meet standards versus the safety and
operational benefits associated with the potential instrument approach minimums
may not balance and thus suggest that the approach procedure is not
economically justified. This same reasoning may apply to the installation of an
approach lighting system to reduce the visibility minimum. The question to be
addressed in this situation is whether the cost to install, operate and maintain the
approach lighting system ( its life cycle cost) is more or less than the incremental
safety and operational benefits.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
ES- 1
Application of this planning rationale was made to the other components of the
Study such as the communications and aviation weather facilities. Visual landing
aid improvements were based on establishing a standard level of service to
pilots irrespective of airport activity levels.
Aviation service needs were determined primarily from the results of a random
survey of pilots and airport managers/ operators as well as input from public
information meetings conducted during the Study. It was recognized that some
of the needs identified by the " users" could not be provided or obtained through
ADOT Aeronautics resources. Nevertheless, these needs were listed in the
Study.
The Study provides an overview of existing capabilities, deficiencies and
recommended improvements to be implemented over a 10- year period.
Although economics has played a significant role in determining facility needs
and the priorities for staging these improvements, operational factors such as
system gaps, remoteness and emergency services may be more important
under certain conditions. This situation is more pronounced in the northeast
quadrant of Arizona ( northern portions of Apache and Navajo counties). Some
of the needs in this region of the State have been accommodated to meet
system objectives with regard to low approach minimum capabilities and weather
movement coverage. However, consideration of other operational factors may
be appropriate when formulating the ADOT Aeronautics Five- Year Airport
Development Program.
Guidelines/ Criteria
The Planning Advisory Committee for the Study established the following criteria
to be used in evaluating terminal navigational aid ( NAVAID) facilities in Arizona:
1. A need for an adequate number of practice instrument approach facilities.
2. Access to emergency medical facilities and capability for night and/ or
adverse weather condition operations at airports in Arizona.
. The use of Federal Aviation Administration Terminal Instrument Approach
Procedures ( TERPS) and airport design guidelines to determine the ability
of airports to meet global positioning system ( GPS) criteria.
. All commercial service and reliever airports should be evaluated for the
potential to provide a GPS precision instrument approach capability
( Category I - 200- foot ceiling and Vz- mile visibility).
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
ES- 2
5. All other paved runway, public- use airports in the State should be
reviewed for the potential to provide GPS nonprecision instrument
approaches ( minimums of 300- foot ceiling and ¾ - mile visibility or 400- foot
ceiling and 1 mile visibility). All active Native American airports were to be
included in the Study.
6. Visual landing guidance facilities will be planned for the primary end of the
primary runway at each airport in Arizona.
Findings
Principal findings with respect to the key components of the Study are presented
below.
GPS Approaches
Thirty- one ( 31) of the 95 system airports have an instrument approach procedure
and, of these, 10 meet the evaluation criterion expressed as a desired or target
level of capability in terms of approach minimums. Eleven ( 11) of the remaining
21 airports can achieve their target levels by development and publication of a
new procedure as suggested in the Study. Of the final 10 airports in this
category, 6 airports cannot qualify for an improved or new procedure due to an
unacceptable cost/ benefit ratio. Of the remaining four ( 4) airports, insufficient
information was available concerning compliance with FAA design standards to
make an objective determination concerning the GPS approach capability.
Many airports ( 64) do not have an existing instrument approach procedure.
Evaluation of these airports indicated that 25 could expect to support an
instrument approach capability consistent with their assigned minimums
category. Also in this group were five ( 5) airports that could not qualify for an
instrument procedure due to an unacceptable cost/ benefit ratio. At another five
( 5) airports, it was determined that an instrument approach procedure was not
possible due to an inability to obtain TERPS criteria. Information concerning
compliance with FAA design standards was not available for 29 airports
identified in this group and additional data will be necessary to justify an
instrument approach procedure.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
ES - 3
Visual Landing Aids
Visual landing aid facilities were required for the primary end of the primary
runway at each airport to provide a consistent service level at airports in Arizona.
A total of 44 airports meet these criteria at the present time while these facilities
need to be installed at 51 airports in the system.
Communications
The ability of pilots to conveniently and efficiently communicate with air traffic
control facilities immediately before and after flight is a valuable service for the
more active airports. The Study revealed that 11 airports within the system
should be provided with this capability. After installation of these facilities, the
total number of airports in Arizona with this capability will increase from 35 to 46
airports.
Weather
Automated weather observing system ( AWOS) and automated surface observing
system ( ASOS) units are operational at 25 airports in Arizona. Application of a
series of evaluation criteria including cost/ benefit analyses demonstrated a need
for an additional 41 units ( 28 AWOS- 3 and 13 AWOS- A).
The establishment of a weather network to acquire and disseminate aviation
weather data on a real- time basis to pilots, airports, federal and state agencies,
and other interest groups, including the general public is possible. The network
can be established using existing and planned State telecommunications
systems and the use of personal computers at airports. The network may be
implemented under a public or a public/ private partnership arrangement.
Aviation Services
The Study revealed that most pilots are satisfied that the essential services
required at airports are available to them. Both pilots and airport
operators/ managers, however, see a need for more hangars, covered tiedowns,
wash racks, rental/ courtesy cars, restaurants/ food service and flight planning
rooms. High on the list of unmet needs was an Arizona aeronautical chart
( previously published in 1992- 93 but discontinued), expansion of aviation
seminars and access to airport/ aviation data and/ or publications.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
ES- 4
Implementation
The criteria for staging NAVAID facilities throughout the 10- year planning period
was based upon scheduling those airports capable of realizing the most
operational benefit in the least amount of time for the initial investment dollars.
The number of airports and the dollars invested in the NAVAID facilities is
illustrated below:
Stage I ( 1- 4 years)
Stage II ( 5- 7 years)
Stage III ( 8- 10 years)
Number of Airports
MALSPJ
GPS SSALS AWOS VISAIDS GCO
25 1 23 19 11
13 8 6 19 0
30 3 12 18 0
Capital Investment ($ x 1,000)
MALSR/
GPS SSALS AWOS VISAIDS GCO
Stage I ( 1- 4 years) 0 150 1,140 821 132
Stage II ( 5- 7 years) 0 2,000 385 821 0
Stage III ( 8- 10 years) O 750 2,305 821 0
Total 0 2,900 3,830 2,463 132
Note: If Category I ILS ( or TLS) equipment is installed at four ( 4) airports
that are qualified for the equipment, Stage I costs will increase by an
additional $ 2,000,000.
System capital costs during the 10- year period could amount to approximately
$ 11.5 million in 1998 dollars. Of that amount, federal funding could account for
as much as $ 8.3 million but more likely those costs would be absorbed by the
State. Operating costs would add an additional $ 728,000 to annual system
costs ( which includes approximately $ 451,000 in annual replacement costs).
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY
ES- 5
QED
Recommendations
The objective of the Study was to provide a comprehensive review of the existing
navigational aids, aviation weather collection and dissemination systems and the
aviation services provided to pilots and other users of aviation in the State. The
NAVAIDS Study examined the existing terminal navigational facilities in the
State, evaluated the capability of all public and Native American airports to
support improved or new NAVAID facilities and quantified the costs associated
with upgrading and improving the existing system during the next 10 years.
Following the recommendations in this Study, the aviation system in the State of
Arizona will be safer, more efficient and improve aviation service to pilots and
other users of the system. The basic NAVAID facilities and aviation services
recommendations made in the Study are:
. Coordinate the design of GPS instrument approaches, both precision and
nonprecision, with the FAA Western- Pacific Region. Follow the priority of
GPS approach establishment determined in the Study for the most cost
effective and operational benefit.
2. Procure and install visual landing aids required at system airports to
improve service and safety throughout the system.
. Equip eligible airports with ground communication outlets ( GCO). The
most efficient and economical method to install GCO equipment would be
purchase the entire package and distribute the equipment to eligible
airports through use agreements. Use agreements should provide for
removal of the GCO in the event that the sponsor could not fulfill its
operating obligation.
. Equip airports with automated weather observing system ( AWOS) utilizing
a package procurement system similar to that recommended for GCO's.
Use agreements should include FAA operating and maintenance
procedures for standardization throughout the State aviation system.
. Evaluate the necessity of reallocating priority for NAVAID installation in
those areas of the State where there are deficient aviation services and
facilities ( Northeast and Southeast Arizona). Emergency service
availability should be a major factor in determining priority.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY
ES- 6
QED
. Coordinate with the State agencies/ divisions to design a weather network
to serve multiple users and needs. Priority should be given to the
northern half of the State. Examine the possibility of a public/ private
partnership to operate and maintain the network.
. Periodically survey pilots, airports and fixed base operators to assess
aviation needs and services. Produce the Arizona Aeronautical chart on a
regular basis. Increase communication with the State's pilots and airport
operators through newsletters, seminars and the Internet. Include the
FAA in the communication/ education process.
. Analyze those airports/ facilities for which insufficient information was
available to determine their capacity to support NAVAID facilities and
services. Determine their ability to comply with FAA airport design criteria
and TERPS. Once determined, modify the results of this Study to include
additional requirements in the NAVAIDS staging and prioritization
sched u les/ p rog rams.
Summary
The NAVAIDS and Aviation Services Special Study met the objectives of the
Aeronautics Division in defining the adequacies of the State's existing
navigational aids and aviation services. The Study analyzed the deficiencies
and outlined a plan to reduce or eliminate the deficiency, improve the service to
pilots and other users and provide facilities in remote areas to facilitate better
access to emergency services. The Study will provide a basis for future
development of the State's aviation system by improving aviation services
throughout, increasing access to weather information for pilots and other users
and increasing safety and security of flying within our borders. In addition, there
is a potential to produce an intra- State weather network that could fulfill the
needs of other State agencies and divisions.
The Study also assessed the costs to the State, the airport and the user. Three
cost scenarios were studied to provide the State with funding requirements that
might take place under a certain set of circumstances. At the time of the Study,
the Aeronautics Division had lost a significant portion of its former aviation
revenue. The FAA was seriously considering the reduction in procurement of
additional NAVAID facilities for airports, a reduction in the number of FAA-maintained
navigational aids and other programs, which would have a serious
financial impact on major portions of this Study.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY
ES- 7
QED
The major tenets of the Study remain intact. Prioritization of facilities were based
primarily on economic factors ( cost/ benefit ratio) but provisions were made to
recognize significant deficiencies in NAVAID coverage or availability of
emergency services in specific instances. There is flexibility within the program
and schedules to allow for adjustment in priorities should that be necessary. In
conclusion, the Study has provided the State with a sound basis for improving
NAVAIDS and services in the next 10 years as well as a foundation to conduct
additional studies in the future. The Study is consistent with the goals and
objectives of the Aeronautics Division and should serve the Division well
throughout the planning period.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
ES- 8
Chapter
1
INTRODUCTION
The State of Arizona acting through its Department of Transportation,
Aeronautics Division has prepared the Navigational Aids and Aviation Services
Special Study to support the mission of encouraging and advancing the safe and
orderly development of aviation in the State. A project advisory committee
representing pilot, airport management and aviation system users participated in
the identification of study findings, recommendations and priorities as input to the
planning process. User surveys and pilot information meetings were also
conducted to obtain input. Key items to be addressed in the Study include
instrument approaches, visual landing aids, communications, weather and
aviation services.
The Study identifies the extent of existing federal and nonfederal resources
available in the Arizona aviation system with respect to:
1. Terminal instrument approach capabilities.
2. Visual landing aids.
3. Air traffic and weather radar coverage.
4. Automated and manned weather observing facilities.
5. Radio and telecommunications networks.
6. Aviation services and facilities.
These existing facilities and capabilities are then compared to anticipated
demands to identify future individual airport and aviation system needs. Care is
exercised to ensure that State initiatives supplement and complement federal
programs in order to maximize the investment of State and local resources.
Underlying these study activities is an assessment of the implementation
schedule of new programs and facilities and future technologies in areas related
to navigation, communications and weather data reporting and networking.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
1- 1
The Study then addresses program options that are appropriate for State
establishment and presents an implementation and prioritization plan. The latter
considers funding requirements, staging and the potential for private sector
participation in a form public/ private partnerships for appropriate system needs.
The chapters that follow present a logical progression of analysis of each of the
study elements and their implementation in the context of an overall program.
Inasmuch as the topics addressed in this study are technical and specific to the
air transportation sector, a glossary of acronyms and definitions is presented in
AppendJx A as an aid to the reader
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
1- 2
EXISTING SYSTEM FACILITIES
Introduction
The Arizona system of airports includes 95 facilities of varying scale and levels of
activity. The system airports include three facilities that are currently closed in
the northeast quadrant of the State and one facility in southeastern Arizona that
is temporarily closed for construction. The northeastern closed airports are
included because they may be reinstated at any time into operation and may
contribute to meeting system objectives for that region. Additionally, three new
airports are included in the Study.
NAVAIDS, VISAIDS and Communications
The deployment of terminal navigational aids, visual landing aids, aviation
weather facilities and communications outlets throughout the Arizona system of
public- use airports is presented in Table 2- 1 and Table 2- 2. Maintenance
responsibility for these facilities may be assigned to the Federal Aviation
Administration ( FAA) or the local airport sponsor ( owner) and is also denoted in
the tables. The data was obtained from FAA records of equipment owned and
maintained by the agency, information provided in the " Airport Facility Directory"
publication and input from airport owners.
The topics addressed in this study are relatively technical in nature and involve
the use of acronyms. As an aid to the reader, a glossary of terms is presented in
Appendix A.
A review of the data presented in Table 2- 1 and Table 2- 2 indicates that:
. With four exceptions, the installation and maintenance of terminal
navigation aids ( NAVAIDS) has been a FAA responsibility. The
exceptions are the nondirectional radio beacon ( NDB) facilities at the Avra
Valley, Chandler Municipal, Glendale Municipal and Sedona airports.
Each NDB was acquired through a combination of FAA, Arizona
Department of Transportation ( ADOT) and airport sponsor funding
through the federal Airport Improvement Program ( ALP). As a
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
2- 1
consequence, maintenance responsibilities for these facilities are
assigned to the airport sponsors.
. Nearly all visual landing aids ( VISAIDS) were acquired through grant
programs administered by the FAA and ADOT or by the airport sponsor
solely. Federal and ADOT grants do not usually allow for maintenance
and thus most facilities are maintained by the airport sponsor. Those
facilities which are maintained by the FAA are typically approach lighting
systems which complement precision instrument landing systems also
established and maintained by the FAA, and certain VISAIDS. All runway
and taxiway edge lighting systems are maintained by the airport sponsor.
. Automated surface observing system ( ASOS) facilities operational at the
airports are maintained by the National Weather Service ( NWS) or, when
installed at a military air base or facility, by the responsible Department of
Defense agency. Automated weather observing systems ( AWOS)
facilities are the responsibility of the FAA when installed under their
Facilities and Equipment Program ( F& E); otherwise, AWOS facilities are
maintained by the airport sponsor.
. Radio communications facilities comprise a variety of types. Those used
for communication from the airport and the airport environment to en route
air traffic control facilities such as remote transmitter/ receiver ( RTR) and
remote communication outlet ( RCO) units are maintained by the FAA.
The FAA also establishes and maintains remote radio communication
systems ( RRCS) which are used to activate those VISAIDS which are
similarly assigned to the FAA. Airport sponsors may also install similar
systems to activate VISAIDS under their responsibility. These are
indicated by the pilot controlled lighting ( PCL) acronym. Communication
between the airport and aircraft where an air traffic control tower ( ATCT) is
not operational is conducted on radios operated and maintained by the
airport sponsor or its designee in accordance with Federal
Communications Commission ( FCC) standards.
In summary, the data presented in Table 2- 1 and Table 2- 2 indicates that the
FAA is responsible for a majority of the terminal NAVAIDS, federal AWOS and
some VlSAID facilities at those airports with scheduled airline service and/ or
significantly higher activity levels. The NWS has maintenance responsibility for
ASOS units. Airport sponsors at all airports are responsible for runway and
taxiway edge lighting systems and most VISAIDS and communications facilities.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
2- 2
In addition to NAVAIDS and communications facilities located on the airports, the
FAA has established these facilities at strategic locations in Arizona. This
equipment is used for en route navigation ( VORTAC and NDB) and as
transmission nodes on internal FAA communications linkages ( RCO). Because
a VORTAC operates on a line- of- sight basis, terrain in its vicinity can restrict the
reception of its transmitted signals at different altitudes. The extent of such
restriction is typically a factor for flights flown at relatively low altitudes. RCO
facilities are commonly collocated with VORTAC units when used off- airport and
in such instances are given the same identifier name. These facilities and
relevant data are summarized in Table 2- 3. All these facilities are maintained by
the FAA.
Balance of page left intentionally blank
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
2- 3
Table 2- 1
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
TERMINAL NAVAIDS AND VISAIDS
Terminal NAVAID VISAID
Airport Type ( R/ W) Maintenance Type ( R/ W) Maintenance
Ajo Municipal None -- LIRL ( 12- 30) Airport
VASI- 2 ( 12) Airport
VASI- 2 ( 30) Airport
Ak- Chin Community None .. None --
Av Suquilla None -- MIRL ( 1- 19) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 1) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 19) Airport
Avra Valley NDB Airport MIRL ( 3- 21) Airport
REIL ( 3) Airport
REIL ( 12) Airport
REIL ( 21) Airport
REIL ( 30) Airport
VASI- 2 ( 3) Airport
VASI- 2 ( 21) Airport
Bagdad None -- LIRL Airport
Benson Municipal ( New) None .. None .-
Bisbee Douglas International VORTAC FAA MIRL ( 8- 26) Airport
MIRL ( 17- 35) Airport
VASI- 2 ( 17) FAA
VASI- 2 ( 35) Airport
Bisbee Municipal None -. MIRL ( 17- 35) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 17) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 35) Airport
Bowie None .. None --
Comments
NDB is VFR- only use.
NA VlGA TIONAL AIDS AND AVlATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 4 QED
Table 2- 1
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
TERMINAL NAVAIDS AND VISAIDS
Terminal NAVAID VISAID
Airport Type ( R/ W)
Buckeye Municipal None
Casa Grande Municipal CAT I ILS ( 5) FAA
DME ( 5) FAA
Chandler Municipal NDB Airport
Maintenance Type ( R/ W) Maintenance
Chinle None --
Cliff Dwellers Lodge None --
Cochise College None --
Cochise County None --
Colorado City Municipal NDB FAA
MIRL ( 17- 35) Airport
PAPI- 4 ( 17) Airport
PAPI- 4 ( 35) Airport
MALSR ( 5) FAA
MIRL ( 5- 23) Airport
VASI- 2 ( 23) Airport
MIRL ( 4L- 22R) FAA
MIRL ( 4R- 22L) FAA
PAPI- 4 ( 4R) FAA
PAPI- 4 ( 22L) FAA
REIL ( 4R) FAA
REIL ( 22L) FAA
VASI- 2 ( 4L) FAA
VASI- 2 ( 22R) FAA
None --
None --
LIRL ( 5- 23) Airport
MIRL ( 3- 21) Airport
MIRL ( 2- 20) Airport
MIRL ( 11- 29) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 11) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 29) Airport
REIL ( 11) Airport
REIL ( 29) Airport
Comments
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 5 Q~__, D
Table 2- 1
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
TERMINAL NAVAIDS AND VISAIDS
Terminal NAVAID VISAID
Airport Type ( R/ W)
Coolidge Municipal None
Cordes Lake ( New) None
Cottonwood Municipal None
Douglas Municipal None
Duncan- O'Connor Field ( Closed) None
EIoy Municipal None
Ernest A. Love Field
Estrella Sallport None
Maintenance Type ( R/ W) Maintenance
CAT I ILS ( 21L) FAA
DME ( 21L) FAA
MIRL ( 5- 23) Airport
VASI- 2 ( 5) Airport
VASI- 2 { 23) Airport
None --
MIRL ( 14- 32) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 14) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 32) Airport
REIL ( 32) Airport
MIRL ( 3- 21) Airport
PAPI- 4 ( 3) Airport
PAPI- 4 ( 211 Airport
None --
MIRL ( 2- 20) Airport
ODALS ( 20) Airport
MALSR ( 21L) FAA
MIRL ( 3L- 21R) Airport
MIRL ( 3R- 21L) Airport
MIRL ( 12- 30) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 3L) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 12) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 21R) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 30) Airport
PAPI- 4 ( 3R) Airport
PAPI- 4 ( 21L) Airport
None --
Comments
ODALS out of service
NA VlGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 6 QED
Table 2- 1
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
TERMINAL NAVAIDS AND VISAIDS
Airport
Flagstaff- Pulliam
Flying J Ranch
Ganado
Gila Bend Municipal
Glendale Municipal
Globe- San Carlos Regional
Grand Canyon Bar- Ten
Grand Canyon Caverns
Grand Canyon National Park
Terminal NAVAID VISAID
Type ( R/ W)
CAT I ILS ( 21)
NDB
VORIDME
None
None
VORTAC
NDB
NDB
Maintenance
FAA
FAA
FAA
FAA
Airport
None
None
CAT I ILS ( 3)
VOR/ DME
FAA
Grand Canyon West None
Greasewood ( Closed ! None
Greenlee County None
H. A. Clark Memorial Field None
FAA
FAA
° .
Type ( R/ W) Maintenance
MALSR ( 21) FAA
MIRL ( 3- 21) Airport
VASI- 4 ( 3) FAA
VASI- 4 ( 21) FAA
None --
None --
LIRL ( 4- 22) Airport
MIRL ( 1- 19) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 1) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 19) Airport
MIRL ( 9- 27) Airport
VASI- 2 ( 9) Airport
VASI- 2 ( 27) Airport
None --
None --
MALSR ( 3) FAA
MIRL ( 3- 21) Airport
REIL ( 21) FAA
VASI- 4 ( 21) FAA
None --
None --
MIRL ( 7- 25) Airport
MIRL ( 18- 36) Airport
Comments
CAT I ILS Includes GS
and LOC only
NDB out of service
CAT I ILS ( 3) MM unusable
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUD Y 2- 7 Q~__:, D
Table 2- 1
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
TERMINAL NAVAIDS AND VISAIDS
Terminal NAVAID VISAID
Airport Type ( R/ W)
Holbrook Municipal None
Hualapal Tribal None
Kayenta None
. °
Kearney None ..
Kingman VOR/ DME FAA
Lake Havasu City Municipal None
Maintenance Type ( R/ W) Maintenance
Laughlin/ Bullhead International None
MIRL ( 3- 21)
REIL ( 3)
REIL ( 21)
VASI- 2 ( 3)
VASI- 2 ( 21)
None
MIRL ( 5- 23)
PVASI ( 23)
None
MIRL ( 3- 21)
MIRL ( 17- 35)
PAPI- 4 ( 17)
PAPI- 4 ( 35)
VASI- 2 ( 3)
VASl- 2 ( 21)
MIRL ( 14- 32)
PAPI- 4 ( 14)
PAPI- 4 ( 32)
REIL ( 14)
REIL ( 32)
MIRL ( 16- 34)
PAPI- 4 ( 16)
PAPI- 4 ( 34)
REIL ( 16)
REIL ( 34)
Airport
Airport
Airport
Airport
Airport
Airport
Airport
Air ) ort
Air ) ort
Air ~ ort
Air tort
Air ~ ort
Air ~ ort
Air ~ ort
Air ~ ort
Air ~ ort
Air ~ ort
Air ~ ort
Air 3ort
Air 3ort
Air ~ ort
Air ~ ort
Air ~ ort
Comments
MIRL ( 5- 23) out of service
PVASI ( 23~ out of service
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 8 QF, D
Table 2- 1
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
TERMINAL NAVAIDS AND VISAIDS
Terminal NAVAID VISAID
Airport Type ( R/ W) Maintenance
Libby AAF/ Sierra Vista CAT I ILS ( 26) US Air Force
Low Mountain ( Closed) None --
Lukachukai None --
Marble Canyon None --
Memorial Airfield None --
Mesa- Falcon Field NDB FAA
Nogales International NDB FAA
VOR/ DME FAA
Type ( RNV) Maintenance
HIRL ( 8- 26)
LIRL ( 2- 20)
MIRL ( 11- 29)
PAPI- 4 ( 11)
PAPI- 4 ( 29)
VASI- 2 ( 8)
VASI- 2 ( 26)
REIL ( 16)
None
None
None
None
MIRL ( 4L- 22R)
MIRL ( 4R- 22L)
PAPI- 2 ( 4L)
PAPI- 2 ( 4R)
PAPI- 2 ( 22L)
PAPI- 2 ( 22R)
MIRL ( 3- 21)
SAVASI- 2 ( 3)
SAVASIo2 ( 21)
US Air Force
US Air Force
US Air Force
US Air Force
US Air Force
US Air Force
US Air Force
Airport
Air ) ort
Air) ort
Air) ort
Air ) ort
Air ) ort
Air ) ort
Air) ort
Air ) ort
Air) ort
Comments
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUD Y 2- 9 Q~__., D
Table 2- 1
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
TERMINAL NAVAIDS AND VISAIDS
Airport
Page Municipal
Payson None
Pearce Ferry None
Phoenix- Deer Valley None
Phoenix- Goodyear None
Terminal NAVAID VISAID
Type ( R/ W)
VORIDME
Maintenance
FAA
=.
Type ( R/ W) Maintenance
MIRL ( 15- 33)
REIL ( 15)
REIL ( 33)
VASI- 4 ( 15)
VASI- 4 ( 33)
MIRL ( 6- 24)
PAPI- 2 ( 24)
None
MIRL ( 7L- 25R)
MIRL ( 7R- 25L)
PVASI ( 7L)
PVASI ( 25R)
REIL ( 7L)
REIL 7R)
REIL ( 25L)
REIL ( 25R)
VASI- 2 ( 7R)
VASI- 2 ( 25L)
MIRL ( 3- 21)
REIL ( 3)
REIL ( 21)
VASI- 2 ( 3)
VASI- 2 ( 21)
Airport
Airport
Airport
FAA
FAA
Airport
Airport
Air ~ ort
Air ) ort
Air ) ort
Air ) ort
AIr) ort
Air ) ort
Air ) ort
Air ) ort
Aiw ) ort
Ah ) ort
All ) ort
Air= ) ort
Air) ort
Air) ort
Ah ) ort
Comments
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUD Y 2- 10 Q~__., D
Table 2- 1
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
TERMINAL NAVAIDS AND VISAIDS
Airport
Phoenix- Sky Harbor
International
Terminal NAVAID VISAID
Type ( R/ W)
CAT I ILS/ DME ( SR)
CAT I ILS ( 26R)
Pinal Airpark None --
Pine Springs None --
Pinon None --
Pleasant Valley International None --
Polaca None --
Quartzsite ( New) None --
Rock Point None --
Rocky Ridge None --
Rolle Airfield None --
Ryan Airfield CAT I ILS ( 6R) FAA
NDB FAA
Safford Regional None
Maintenance
FAA
FAA
Type ( R/ W) Maintenance
HIRL ( 8L- 26R) Airport
HIRL ( SR- 26L) Airport
MALSR ( 8R) FAA
REIL ( 26L) Airport
REIL ( 26R) Airport
VASI- 4 ( 8L) FAA
VASI- 6 ( 26L) FAA
VASI- 4 ( 26R) FAA
MIRL ( 12- 30) Airport
None --
None --
None --
LIRL ( 4- 22) Airport
None --
None --
None
None
MIRL ( 6R- 24L) Airport
REIL ( 6R) Airport
REIL ( 24L) FAA
MIRL ( 8- 26) Airport
MIRL ( 12- 30) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 8) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 26) Airport
VASI- 2 ( 12) Airport
VASI- 2 ( 30) Airport
Comments
CAT I ILS ( 26R) Includes GS
and LOC only
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 11 QED
Table 2- 1
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
TERMINAL NAVAIDS AND VISAIDS
Terminal NAVAID VISAID
Airport Type ( R/ W~
San Carlos None
San Manuel None
Scottsdale NDB
Maintenance
FAA
Sedona NDB Airport
Seligman None ..
Sells None ..
Show Low Municipal NDB FAA
Shonto None
Springerville Babbit Field None
Type ( R/ W) Maintenance
LIRL ( 14- 32) Airport
None --
MIRL ( 3- 21) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 3) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 21) Airport
REIL ( 3) Airport
REIL ( 21) Airport
MIRL ( 3- 21) Airport
REIL ( 3) FAA
VASI- 2 ( 3) Airport
VASI- 2 ( 21) Airport
None --
None --
MIRL ( 6- 24) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 6) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 24) Airport
REIL ( 6) Airport
REIL ( 24) Airport
None ..
MIRL ( 3- 21) Airport
MIRL ( 11- 29) Airport
VASI- 2 ( 3) Airport
VASI- 2 ( 11) Airport
VASI- 2 ( 21) Airport
Comments
NDB out of service
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 12 QED
Table 2- 1
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
TERMINAL NAVAIDS AND VISAIDS
Airport
St. Johns Industrial Airpark
Terminal NAVAID VISAID
Type ( R/ W~
None
Stellar AIrpark None
Sun Valley None
Superior Municipal None
Taylor Municipal None
Temple Bar None
Tombstone Municipal None
Toyel School ( Closed) None
Tuba City None
Maintenance Type ( R/ W)
-- MIRL ( 14- 32)
PAPI- 2 ( 14)
PAPI- 2 ( 32)
REIL ( 32)
-- LIRL ( 17- 35)
VASl- 4 ( 17)
-- LIRL ( 18- 36)
-- None
-- MIRL ( 3- 21)
PAPI- 2 ( 3)
PAPI- 2 ( 21)
REIL ( 3)
REIL ( 21)
-- None
-- None
-- None
-- MIRL ( 15- 33)
PAPI- 2 ( 15)
PAPI- 2 ( 33)
Maintenance
Airport
Airport
Airport
Airport
Airport
Airport
Airport
= .
Airport
Airport
Airport
Airport
Airport
. .
. .
. =
Airport
Airport
Airport
Comments
LIRL ( 17- 35) is nonstandard
LIRL ( 18- 36) is nonstandard
MIRL ( 15- 33) out of service
PAPI- 2 ( 17) out of service
PAPI- 2 ( 35) out of service
NA VlGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUD Y 2- 13 Q ~_., D
Table 2- 1
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
TERMINAL NAVAIDS AND VISAIDS
Airport
Tucson International
Tuweep None
Whiteriver None
Wickenburg Municipal None
Terminal NAVAID VISAID
Type ( R/ W) Maintenance
CAT I ILS ( 11L) FAA
DME FAA
Williams Gateway CAT I ILS ( 30C) Airport
VORTAC FAA
Window Rock None
Type ( R/ W) Maintenance
HIRL ( 11L- 29R) Airport
MALSR ( 11L) FAA
MIRL ( 11R- 29L) Airport
MIRL ( 3- 21) Airport
PAPI- 4 ( 11L) FAA
REIL ( 11R) Airport
REIL ( 21) FAA
REIL ( 29L) Airport
REIL ( 29R) Airport
VASI4 ( 21) FAA
VASI. 6 ( 29R) FAA
None --
MIRL ( 1- 19) Alrport
MIRL ( 5- 23) Alrport
PAPI- 4 ( 23) Airport
ALSF- 1 ( 30C) Airport
MIRL ( 12C- 30C) Airport
MIRL ( 12R- 30L) Airport
VASI- 4 ( 12C) Airport
VASI- 4 ( 30C) Airport
MIRL ( 2- 20) Airport
PAPI- 2 ( 2) Airport
REIL ( 2) Airport
Comments
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL S TUD Y 2- 14 Q~_., D
Table 2- 1
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
TERMINAL NAVAIDS AND VISAIDS
Terminal NAVAID VISAID
Airport Type ( R/ W)
Winslow Municipal None
Yuma International
Maintenance Type ( R/ W~
-- MIRL ( 4- 22)
MIRL ( 11- 29)
REIL ( 11)
REIL ( 22)
VASI- 4 ( 11)
VASI- 4 ( 22)
VASI- 4 ( 29)
HIRL ( 3L- 21R)
HIRL ( 3R- 21L)
HIRL ( 8- 26)
HIRL ( 17- 35)
MALSR ( 21R)
REIL ( 35)
VASI- 4 ( 17)
CAT IlLS ( 21R) FAA
Maintenance
Airport
Airport
FAA
FAA
FAA
FAA
FAA
Airport
Airport
Airport
Airport
FAA
FAA
FAA
Comments
Yuma International Airport is a
civil I military joint use facility
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ° . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . °° . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ° o° . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o°°°° o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Note: See Appendix A for acronym definitions.
Sources: FAA records and Airport I Facility Directory, 1997.
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL S TUB Y 2- 15 Q ~__,~)
Table 2- 2
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
WEATHER FACILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS OUTLETS
Airport
AJo Municipal None
Ak- Chln Community None
Av Suquilla None
Avra Valley AWOS- 3
Bagdad None
Benson Municipal ( New I None
Bisbee Douglas International None
Bisbee Municipal None
Bowie None
Buckeye Municipal None
Casa Grande Municipal AWOS- 3
Chandler Municipal AWOS- 3
Weather Facility Communications Outlet
Type Maintenance Type Maintenance
-- CTAF Airport
PCL Airport
RCO FAA
-- None -.
-- CTAF/ Unlcom Airport
PCL Airport
Airport CTAFIUnicom Airport
PCL Airport
-- CTAF Airport
RCO FAA
-- None -.
-- CTAFIUnlcom Airport
RCO FAA
RRCS FAA
-- CTAF/ Unicom Airport
RCO FAA
-- CTAF Airport
-- CTAF/ Unlcom Airport
RCO FAA
FAA CTAF/ Unicom Airport
RRCS FAA
Airport ATCT Airport
ATIS Airport
CTAF/ Unicom Airport
PCL Airport
Comments
RRCS activates MIRL ( 17- 35)
RRCS activates MALSR ( 5)
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 16 QE[~
Table 2- 2
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
WEATHER FACILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS OUTLETS
Airport
Chinle None
Cliff Dwellers Lodge None
Cochise College None
Cochise County None
Colorado City Municipal AWOS- 3
Coolidge Municipal None
Cordes Lake ( New) None
Cottonwood Municipal None
Douglas Municipal None
Duncan- O'Connor Field ( Closed) None
Eloy Municipal None
Ernest A. Love Field ASOS- C
Estrella Sailport None
Weather Facilib/ Communications Outlet
Type Maintenance Type Maintenance
. .
Airport
FAA
. °
NWS
None --
Unicom Airport
CTAF/ Unicom Airport
CTAF/ Unicom Airport
RCO FAA
CTAFIUnicom Airport
PCL Airport
CTAF/ Unicom Airport
PCL Airport
None --
CTAF/ Unicom Airport
PCL Airport
CTAFIUnicom Airport
PCL Airport
RCO FAA
None
CTAF/ Unicom Airport
ATCT FAA
ATIS FAA
CTAF Airport
FSS FAA
PCL Airport
RTR FAA
Unicom Airport
CTAF Airport
Comments
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2.17 QF__:, D
Table 2- 2
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
WEATHER FACILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS OUTLETS
Airport
Flagstaff- Pulllam
Flying J Ranch None
Ganado None
Gila Bend Municipal None
Glendale Municipal
Globe- San Carlos Regional None
Grand Canyon Bar- Ten
Grand Canyon Caverns
Weather Facility Communications Outlet
Type Maintenance Type Maintenance
ASOS- C NWS
Bm
. °
None
None ° .
ATCT FAA
ATIS FAA
CTAF Airport
RCO FAA
RRCS FAA
CTAF Airport
CTAF Airport
CTAFIUnicom Airport
PCL Airport
RCO FAA
ATCT FAA
CTAF Airport
PCL Airport
RCO FAA
Unicom Airport
CTAF/ Unicom Airport
PCL Airport
RCO FAA
CTAF Airport
CTAF/ Unicom Airport
Comments
RRCS activates MALSR ( 21)
and MIRL ( 3- 21)
NA VlGA TIONAL A IDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL S TUD Y 2- 18 QED
Table 2- 2
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
WEATHER FACILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS OUTLETS
Airport
Grand Canyon National Park
Grand Canyon West None
Greasewood ( Closed) None
Greenlee County None
H. A. Clark Memorial Field
Holbrook Municipal
Weather Facility Communications Outlet
Type Maintenance Type Maintenance
ASOS- B
None
None
NWS ATCT FAA
ATIS FAA
CTAF Airport
RCO FAA
RRCS FAA
RTR FAA
Unicom Airport
-- None --
-- CTAF Airport
-- CTAF Airport
PCL Airport
-- CTAF Airport
-- CTAF Airport
PCL Airport
RCO FAA
-- None --
-- CTAF Airport
-- CTAF Airport
NWS CTAFIUnicom Airport
RCO FAA
Airport CTAFIUnicom Airport
PCL Airport
Hualapai Tribal None
Kayenta None
Kearney None
Kingman ASOS- D
Lake Havasu City Municipal AWOS- 3
Comments
RRCS activates MALSR ( 3)
and MIRL ( 3- 21)
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUD Y 2- 19 QED
Table 2- 2
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
WEATHER FACILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS OUTLETS
Airport
Laughlin/ Bullhead International
Libby AAFISierra Vista
None
AWOS- 3
Low Mountain ( Closed) None
Lukachukal None
Marble Canyon None
Memorial Airfield None
Mesa- Falcon Field LAWRS
Nogales International ASOS- D
Weather Facility Communications Outlet
Type Maintenance Type Maintenance
ATCT FAA
CTAF Airport
PCL Airport
Unicom Airport
US Air Force ATCT US Air Force
ATIS US Air Force
CTAF US Air Force
PCL US Air Force
Unicom US Air Force
None
None
CTAF Airport
Unicom Airport
FAA ATCT FAA
ATIS FAA
CTAF Airport
RTR FAA
Unicorn Airport
NWS CTAF/ Unicom Airport
PCL Airport
RCO FAA
NWS CTAF/ Unlcom Airport
PCL Airport
RCO FAA
-- CTAFIUnlcom Airport
Page Municipal ASOS- D
Payson None
Comments
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 20 QED
Table 2- 2
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
WEATHER FACILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS OUTLETS
Airport
Pearce Ferry None --
Phoenix- Deer Valley ASOS- C NWS
Weather Facility Communictions Outlet
Type Maintenance Type Maintenance
Phoenix- Goodyear LAWRS FAA
Phoenix- Sky Harbor ASOS- A NWS
International LLWAS FAA
Plnal Airpark None
Pine Springs None
Pinon None
Pleasant Valley International None
Polacca None
Quartzsite ( New) None
Rock Point None
° °
° °
CTAF Airport
ATCT FAA
ATIS FAA
CTAF Airport
RCO FAA
RTR FAA
Unicorn Airport
ATCT FAA
ATIS FAA
CTAF Airport
RCO FAA
RTR FAA
Unicom Airport
ATCT FAA
ATIS FAA
RCO FAA
RTR FAA
Unicorn Airport
CTAF/ Unicom Airport
None --
None --
None --
None --
None --
None --
Comments
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVlATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 21 QEE)
Table 2- 2
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
WEATHER FACILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS OUTLETS
Airport
Rocky Ridge None --
Rolle Airfield None --
Ryan Airfield AWOS. 3 FAA
Weather Facility Communications Outlet
Type Maintenance Type Maintenance
Safford Regional ASOS- D NWS
San Carlos None --
San Manuel None --
Scottsdale ASOS- C NWS
LAWRS FAA
Sedona AWOS- 3 Airport
Seligman None
Sells None
Show Low Municipal None
None
CTAF Airport
ATCT FAA
CTAF Airport
RCO FAA
CTAFIUnicom Airport
RCO FAA
None --
CTAF Airport
ATCT FAA
ATIS FAA
CTAF Airport
PCL Airport
RCO Airport
RTR Airport
Unicom Airport
CTAF/ Unlcom Airport
PCL Airport
RCO FAA
RRCS FAA
CTAF Airport
CTAF Airport
Unlcom Airport
CTAF/ Unicom Airport
PCL Airport
Comments
RRCS activates REIL ( 3)
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 22 QF.]~
Table 2- 2
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
WEATHER FACILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS OUTLETS
Airport
Shonto None
Weather Facility Communications Outlet
Type Maintenance Type Maintenance
None
Comments
Springerville Babbit Field
St. Johns Industrial Airpark
None
ASOS- D
-- CTAFIUnicom Airport
PCL Airport
NWS CTAF/ Unicom Airport
RCO FAA
Stellar Airpark None
Sun Valley None . .
Superior Municipal None --
Taylor Municipal AWOS- 3 Airport
Temple Bar None
Tombstone Municipal None
Toyei School ( Closed~ None
Tuba City None
. .
° .
. .
CTAFIUnicom Airport
CTAF/ Unicom Airport
PCL Airport
CTAF Airport
CTAF/ Unicom Airport
PCL Airport
CTAFIUnicom Airport
CTAF Airport
CTAF/ Unicom Airport
CTAF Airport
RCO FAA
MIRL ( 15- 33) out of service
Tucson International ASOS- B NWS
LLWAS FAA
Tuweep None
Whiteriver None
Wickenburg Municipal None
. °
. °
° .
ATCT FAA
ATIS FAA
RCO FAA
RTR FAA
Unicom Airport
CTAF Airport
CTAF/ Unicom Airport
CTAFIUnicom Airport
PCL Airport
NA VlGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 23 Q~-,]~
Table 2- 2
EXISTING FACILITIES SUMMARY
WEATHER FACILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS OUTLETS
Airport
Williams Gateway None
Weather Facility Communications Outlet
Type Maintenance Type Maintenance
Window Rock ASOS. D NWS
Winslow Municipal ASOS- D NWS
Yuma InternaUonal ASOS- A US Navy
ATCT FAA
ATIS FAA
CTAF Airport
CTAFIUnicom Airport
PCL Airport
RCO FAA
CTAFIUnicom Airport
RCO FAA
RRCS FAA
ATCT USMC
ATIS USMC
CTAF USMC
PCL USMC
RCO FAA
Unlcom USMC
Comments
Yuma International Airport is a
civil I military Joint use facility
o. . . . . . . . . . . .°° . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ° . . . . . . . . . . . °° . . . . . . . . °°.° . . . . . . . . oo° o°° o°°°°°°°°° . . . . . . . °°° . . . . . . . °.° ooo . . . . . . °°,,
Note: See Appendix A for acronym definitions.
Sources: FAA records and Airport I Facility Directory, 1997.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 24 QE]~
Table 2- 3
EXISTING OFF- AIRPORT NAVAIDS AND
COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES
Facili~ Name/ Location
BardlYuma
BardlYuma
Type Agency Comments
VORTAC FAA VORTAC unusable:
280 ° - 300 ° beyond 27 nm below 3,600' MSL
RCO FAA --
Buckeye I Buckeye VORTAC FAA
Dra~] oo I Llbby- Slerra Vista NDB FAA
Drake I Prescott VORTAC FAA
Flagstaff I Flagstaff
MIn~ lus Mountain I Jerome
NDB FAA
RCO FAA
VOR portion unusable:
060 ° - 075 ° beyond 28 nm below 4,000' MSL
230 ° - 260 ° beyond 35 nm below 5,000' MSL
280 ° - 320 ° beyond 35 nm below 7,000' MSL
320 ° - 020 ° beyond 37 nm below 6,000' MSL
DME unusable 020 ° - 072 ° beyond 28 nm
below 8,000' MSL
VOR unusable:
055 o - 080 ° beyond 29 nm
125 ° - 140 ° beyond 35 nm
140 ° - 160 ° beyond 30 nm
160 ° - 175 ° beyond 35 nm
175 ° - 185 ° beyond 30 nm
185 ° - 195 ° beyond 23 nm
1950 - 220 ° beyond 13 nm
220 ° - 236 o beyond 25 nm
265 ° - 275 ° beyond 30 nm
below 9,300' MSL
below 8,500' MSL
below 9,500' MSL
below 9,500' MSL
below 9,500' MSL
below 9,100' MSL
below 9,100' MSL
below 9,100' MSL
below 8,800' MSL
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 25 (~ E]~
Table 2- 3
EXISTING OFF- AIRPORT NAVAIDS AND
COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES
Facility Name I Location Type Agency
Mount Lemon I Tucson RCO FAA
Comments
Needles I Topock VORTAC FAA
Peach Springs I Peach Springs VORTAC FAA
Peach Springs I Peach Springs RCO FAA
Phoenix I Tempe VORTAC FAA
Robles NDB FAA
HIWAS broadcast
VOR unusable:
100 ° - 130 ° beyond 27 nm below 6,600' MSL
170 ° - 2200 beyond 20 nm below 5,800' MSL
2200 - 280 ° beyond 35 nm below 6,800' MSL
. .
. .
HIWAS broadcast
090 ° - 1000 beyond 15 nm below 8,000' MSL
185 ° - 190 ° beyond 30 nm below 8,000' MSL
185 ° - 190 ° beyond 35 nm below 9,000' MSL
190 ° - 2350 beyond 20 nm below 10,000' MSL
345 ° - 034 ° beyond 10 nm below 6,000' MSL
3450 - 034 o beyond 20 nm below 8,000' MSL
345 ° - 0150 beyond 33 nm below tl, 000' MSL
0150 - 034 ° beyond 33 nm below 10,000' MSL
. .
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 26 QE~)
Table 2- 3
EXISTING OFF- AIRPORT NAVAIDS AND
COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES
Facility Name I Location ~ Agency
San Simon VORTAC FAA
St. Johns I St. Johns VORTAC FAA
Stanfield I Stanfield VORTAC FAA --
Stanfield I Stanfield RCO FAA --
Comments
VORTAC unusable:
020 ° - 050 ° beyond 30 nm below 8,000' MSL
150 ° - 190 ° beyond 28 nm below 11,300' MSL
190 ° - 220 ° beyond 30 nm below 9,000' MSL
235 ° - 250 ° beyond 30 nm below 9,900' MSL
350 ° - 360 ° beyond 30 nm below 8,000' MSL
Tuba City I Tuba City VORTAC FAA
Tucson I Tucson VORTAC FAA
Willie I Chandler VORTAC FAA
Winslow I Winslow VORTAC FAA
Zunl I Zunl VORTAC FAA
. .
HIWAS broadcast
VORTAC unusable:
350 ° - 005 ° beyond 30 nm below 11,20' MSL
350 ° - 020 ° beyond 30 nm below 13,000' MSL
VORTAC unusable:
150 ° - 195 ° beyond 20 nm below 7,500 ° MSL
HIWAS broadcast
HIWAS broadcast
Note: See Appendix A for acronym definitions.
Source: Airport I Facility Directory, 1997.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 27 QF. D
Air Traffic Control Radar Coverage
Radar coverage for air traffic control throughout Arizona is provided by airport
surveillance radars ( ASR) and air route surveillance radars ( ARSR). ASR
facilities are used primarily for terminal air traffic control and normally cover an
area within a 55- nautical mile to 60- nautical mile radius of the radar site. ASR- 9
units are installed in the Phoenix and Tucson areas and ASR- 8 facilities at the
Williams Gateway and Yuma International airports.
Radar facility coverage is characterized by line- of- sight and thus high terrain
within the coverage radius of the ASR could block aircraft target identification at
lower altitudes. This restriction occurs in portions of areas north, east and west of
the Phoenix ASR beginning at elevations ranging between 1,500 feet above
mean sea level ( MSL) and 3,000 feet MSL.
Coverage of Arizona en route airspace is provided by ARSR- 4 units located at
Humboldt Mountain, and strategic sites near Seligman and Yuma in Arizona, and
Angel Peak in Nevada. The ARSR normally provides a 200- nautical mile radius
of coverage and those used for air traffic control purposes in Arizona airspace
have clear areas of coverage at elevations of 11,000 feet MSL and above.
Radar coverage below this altitude is spotty. This deficiency and alternate
means to enhance radar coverage at low altitudes should be explored by ADOT
Aeronautics with the FAA.
Required improvements or enhancements to the available radar coverage are a
federal responsibility. In the future, satellite- based radar coverage technology
will be implemented and this will overcome shortfalls associated with traditional
ground- based radar systems as noted above.
Balance of page left intentionally blank
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
2- 28
Aviation Weather
The NWS and FAA currently take or contract out manned aviation surface
observations which on June 1, 1996 were renamed as meteorological aerodrome
reports ( METAR) at several locations within Arizona. The NWS may use its own
staff at a weather forecast office ( WFO) or weather service office ( WSO) to take
surface observations, or contract this activity at a weather service contract
meteorological office ( WSCMO). NWS observations are taken hourly or when
needed as significant changes in weather occur.
The NWS has also established a supplemental aviation weather observation
program where the federal government cannot provide aviation weather
observations and has no requirement for such activity, except possibly to provide
a forecast service for a particular location. These supplementary aviation
weather reporting stations ( SAWRS) are established and staffed by the local
operators at their own expense and under NWS supervision and certification.
However, SAWRS reports are not normally entered into the national weather
data collection system because they are intended to serve certain aircraft
operations at a particular airport. The SAWRS observations may be taken on an
hourly or more frequent basis, or at irregular intervals, and are restricted to
aircraft operated by the entity serving as the SAWRS observer.
The FAA takes hourly, or when required, special weather observations at airports
under the limited aviation weather reporting program. These limited aviation
weather reporting station ( LAWRS) observations are taken by air traffic control
tower ( ATCT), automated flight service station ( AFSS), flight service station
( FSS) or contract personnel. The latter are termed federal contract weather
observing sites ( FCWOS).
The NWS and FAA are in the process of automating surface aviation weather
observations although the NWS continues to operate 1960' s technology
automatic meteorological observing stations ( AMOS) at some airports and
nonairport locations. The NWS, as an element of its modernization plan, has
initiated the establishment of ASOS units at selected airports across the country.
The FAA F& E program provides for the establishment of Level 3 AWOS units.
Airports not designated to receive an ASOS or F& E AWOS- 3 may obtain an
AWOS ( Level A, 1, 2 or 3) through the FAA's administration of the AlP, or
acquire the unit directly with its own funds or with state aviation agency funding
participation. Many airports across the country have taken such action, including
several airports in Arizona.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
2 - 29
Table 2- 2 also presents a summary of the existing installed or precommissioned
deployment of ASOS and AWOS units at the public- use system airports in
Arizona. An AWOS- 3 is also operational at Bedard Field, a private- use system
airport located approximately 17 nautical miles south- southwest of Kayenta, and
is maintained by the airport sponsor.
Table 2- 4 summarizes the location of existing NWS, FAA and local airport
weather reporting locations in Arizona, and these are illustrated in Figure 2- 1.
Some are collocated with ASOS or AWOS units in order to afford opportunity for
augmented reports by observers. In response to industry and pilot requests, the
NWS and FAA have defined four levels of ASOS for which full, some or no
augmentation is required. Table 2- 5 summarizes the ASOS service standard
levels, which are noted for the applicable sites presented in Table 2- 1. The
weather reporting parameters associated with AWOS facilities are shown in
Table 2- 6.
Balance of page left intentionally blank
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
2-, 30
Table 2- 4
MANNED WEATHER OBSERVATION SITES
Airport Type Service Comments
Bisbee Douglas International
Chandler Municipal
Ernest A. Love Field
Libby AAF- Sierra Vista
Gila Bend Municipal
Mesa- Falcon Field
Payson ( non- airport site)
Phoenix- Deer Valley
Phoenix- Goodyear
Phoenix- Sky Harbor International
Safford Regional
Scottsdale
Williams Gateway
LAWRS 1
LAWRS
LAWRS
LAWRS
LAWRS
LAWRS
SAWRS 2
LAWRS
LAWRS
LAWRS
AMOS a
LAWRS
SAWRS
24 hours; FAA contractor
0600 - 2100; FAA ATCT observer
24 hours; FSS observer and contractor
0600 - 2100; US Army observer
0700 - 2200; US Air Force observer
0600 - 2100
Every 3 hours between 0800 - 1700
0600 - 2100; FAA ATCT observer
0600 - 2100; FAA contractor
24 hours; FAA contractor
24 hours; possible observer augmentation
0600- 2100
O60O - 2100
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ° . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ° . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Notes : Hours where indicated are local time.
See Appendix A for acronym definitions.
Source: National Weather Service records, 1997.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,° . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o... . . . . . . . . .
1. LAWRS - Limited Aviation Weather Reporting Station.
2. SAWRS - Supplemental Aviation Weather Reporting Station.
3. AMOS - Automatic Meteorological Observing System.
NA VlGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VlA"/' ION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 31 Q E]~
Page left intentionally blank
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
2- 32
Figure 2- 1
EXISTING WEATHER OBSERVATION SITES
MO H. 4 VE COCONtNO c) acj e NA VA JO
Colorado City
Grand Canyon
• National Park
Kingman
• YAVAPA/ Sedona • Flagstaff ~ mslow
k Ernest ~"
Show Low
e~
Deer Valley
MA, R ~" O P/ I
• • Sco ttsdale
• e
Phoem~ Mesa- Falcon
~ 1r LA PAZ Goodyear• • • Williams
! YUMA Sky .' lar~ or ,~ .
] 1 0~ ~ ..... y Chandler
Gila Bend Casa Grande
I • ( tlr'nR Int'l PIN, 4L
P~ MA 1~ Avra Valley
Ryan Tucson
w • Int'l
SANTA CRUZ
No~ es
LEGEND
• AMOS
• ASOS
~, AWOS
,& AWOS- F
• LAWRS
• SAWRS
Automatic Meteorological Observing System
Automated Surface Observing System
Automated Weather Observing System
AWOS- 3 - FAA Facilities and Equipment Program Unit
Limited Aviation Weather Reporting Station
Supplemental Aviation Weather Reporting Station
SOURCE: National Weather Service and Federal Aviation Administration records, 1997
APACHE
Window Rock
St. Johns
GREENE EE
Saff3rd
GRAHAM
COCHISE
libby AAF/ Sierra Vista
Bis~ ee- Oouglas
t £ 1 inch = 50 n. m.
( approximate)
N
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
Table 2- 5
ASOS SERVICE STANDARD LEVELS ( C and D)
ASOS SERVICE LEVEL D
( No Augmentation)
Wind Speed and Direction
Visibility
Precipitation and
Obstruction to Vision
Cloud Height and Sky Cover
Temperature and Dew Point
Altimeter
Freezing Rain
Lightning Reporting*
* In operational testing
Notes:
ASOS AUGMENTATION
SERVICE LEVEL C
Thunderstorms
Tornadoes
Hail
Virga
Volcanic Ash
Tower Visibility
Augmentation consists of adding the weather elements shown for the designated ASOS Service Level at the site, if observed.
Back- up consists of Inserting the correct value if the system malfunctions or is unrepresentative.
Air traffic control specialists are allowed the option of adding operationally significant remarks.
During hours that the observing facility is closed, the site reverts to Level Service D.
Service Level D consists of an ASOS continually measuring the atmosphere at a point near the runway.
NA VlGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL S TUD Y 2- 35 QED
Table 2- 5
ASOS SERVICE STANDARD LEVELS ( A and B)
ASOS AUGMENTATION
SERVICE LEVEL B
All Level Service C and:
Longline Runway Visual Range at precedented sites*
Freezing Drizzle versus Freezing Rain
Ice Pellets
Snow Depth and Snow Increasing Rapidly remarks
Thunderstorms and Lightning Location remarks
Observed Significant Weather not at the Station remarks
* In operational testing
ASOS AUGMENTATION
SERVICE LEVEL A
All Level Service B, C and:
1O- Minute Longline Runway Visual Range
at precedented sites or Additional Visibility
Increments of 118, 1116 and O*
Sector Visibility
Variable Sky Conditions
Cloud Layers Above 12,000 feet
and Cloud Types
Widespread Dust, Sand and Other
Obscuratlons
Volcanic Eruptions
"~ o~';;; ......... ~,'~; ~'~'; n'~;~ ion"~' o'~ ;' i; i;," o'i';~;~ i n'~"~ ~'~' w~:~ i~'~;"'; i;~ ; n~;;';'~ o~;' io;'~'~; "~';; i'~ n~ i'~'~" 7'~' 6 § "~'; ~; i'~';'£;;; i" ; i"~ ~;'; i'i;~" i ~" o'~ ;~'~ e ~.
Back- up consists of Inserting the correct value If the system malfunctions or Is unrepresentative.
Air traffic control specialists are allowed the option of adding operationally significant remarks.
During hours that the observing facility Is closed, the site reverts to Level Service D.
Service Level O consists of an ASOS continually measuring the atmosphere at a point near the runway.
Source: FAA document, t997.
NA VlGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA nON SERVICES SPECIAL STUD Y 2- 36 QF. D
Table 2- 6
AWOS LEVELS AND REPORTS
Sensor
Atmospheric Pressure
Wind Direction
Wind Speed
Temperature
Dew Point
Visibility
Cloud Height
AWOS SPECIFICATIONS BY LEVEL
AWOS Level
Specification A 1 2 3
16.9" Hg to 31/ 5" Hg
Accuracy to +/- 5 °
0 knots to 125 knots
- 60° F to + 130° F
- 30° F to + 86° F
To and including 10 miles
20 feet to 10,000 feet
X X X X
X X X
X X X
X X X
X X X
X X
X
Text of Report
Airport Identifcation
Type of Report
Time of Day
Sky Condition
Visibility
Temperature
Dew Point
Wind Direction
Wind Gust
Altimeter Setting
AWOS REPORT DETAIL
Report Detail
Airport name and location
States that the report is AWOS- generated
Greenwich Mean Time ( GMT)
Cloud height and sky coverage in 100- foot increments
Visibility near runway
Air temperature near runway
Condensation temperature near runway
Speed to nearest knot if greater than 5 knots; calm if below 5 knots
Reported to the nearest knot
Pressure at surface to nearest 0.01 '° Hg
Source: FAA Advisory Circular, 15015220.16B.
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SER VICES SPECIAL STUD Y 2- 37 Q~. E)
METAR Dissemination
Although the availability of a METAR is important to support aviation activity at
the location where the observation is taken, the data is also of value to users in
other locations for flight planning and weather forecasting purposes. Therefore,
a system of networks exists to facilitate the collection and dissemination of
weather data. Presently, NWS offices use the automation of field operations and
services ( AFOS) computer network to transmit this data to other NWS offices.
Concurrently, the data is transmitted to the NWS Systems Operations Center
( SOC) in Suitland, Maryland for distribution to various public agency and private
subscriber users. The SOC gateway system transfers the data and other
weather products ( terminal forecasts, center weather advisories, ( etc.) to the
FAA national aviation weather processor ( NAWP) in Salt Lake City, Utah that
handles the western portion of the country including Arizona. A second NAWP
is located in Atlanta, Georgia to serve the eastern half of the country. Each
NAWP then forwards the data to each other and their associated regional FAA
air route traffic control center ( ARTCC), AFSS and FSS computers via the
national airspace data interchange network ( NADIN). FAA observations are
transmitted to the NWS SOC via NADIN. There, the NWS uses AFOS to
disseminate the FAA data to other NWS offices. NAWP serves as the primary
FAA gateway to the NWS telecommunications gateway ( NWSTG) which is the
source of NWS products for the FAA and the national airspace system.
NADIN is a multi- node, distributor- processor network through which information
pertaining to air traffic is exchanged between FAA facilities and the U. S. military,
domestic air carriers, commercial data communication providers and the
international aviation community. NADIN concentrators located at each ARTCC
are connected to the NAWP. NADIN is being upgraded to a packet switching
network referred to as NADIN- II that will permit high data flow capacity and
efficiency to the network users.
NWS AMOS and ASOS and FAA F& E AWOS- 3 reports are also collected and
disseminated on their respective networks. The FAA is presently finalizing plans
to establish the AWOS/ ASOS data acquisition system ( ADAS). ADAS will use
landline communications to access AWOS- and ASOS- generated reports on a
scheduled basis or when certain parameter levels are reached that trigger the
release of a special report. This information is routed to ADAS concentrators
located at the nearest ARTCC for distribution via the NAWP to serve other FAA
facilities and via NADIN to NWS locations. Although ADAS is intended to serve
FAA F& E AWOS- 3 and FAA- required ASOS sites, data from airport sponsor-installed
AWOS- 3 units may be integrated into the FAA network under certain
procedures and protocols.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
2- 38
ASOS and AWOS units located at nontowered airports broadcast their
observations on a continuous basis via a discrete frequency transmitter or in
conjunction with other very high frequency ( VHF) radio transmission outlets.
ASOS units located at airports with an ATCT and/ or automatic terminal
information system ( ATIS) do not broadcast continuously when the ATCT or
ATIS is operational. In these instances, the ASOS report is given by the air
traffic controller or included in the ATIS broadcast.
Weather Radar
The NWS and FAA have instituted new weather radar programs that employ
Doppler technology to monitor severe weather. The NWS program, commonly
referred to as next generation radar ( NEXRAD) will provide information on
precipitation, wind velocity and turbulence at an advanced level of detection and
is intended for advisories within en route airspace. NEXRAD provides weather
products related to frontal activity, hail, hurricane, icing conditions, tornadoes,
turbulence, winds and wind shear. NEXRAD also provides useful reflectivity and
storm detection out to a radius of about 250 nautical miles. The Doppler
products of NEXRAD are confined to a range of 125- nautical miles. NWS
NEXRAD imagery will be conveyed via the advanced weather interactive
processing system ( AWIPS) for agency- wide distribution. The latest version of
the NEXRAD program radar is the WSR- 88D model.
The FAA has installed terminal Doppler weather radars ( TDWR) at airports to
provide improved short- range coverage. The TDWR identifies wind shear and
other weather events by measuring wind fields within a 50- nautical mile radius of
the terminal area. A TDWR is located approximately 10 miles west of the
Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport.
Table 2- 7 identifies the NEXRAD and TDWR locations that provide coverage
within Arizona. Nearly the entire State is covered by the NEXRAD sites, with
many areas of overlap, as illustrated in Figure 2- 2.
Balance of page left intentionally blank
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
2- 39
Table 2- 7
EXISTING WEATHER RADAR FACILITIES
Radar Location Type Radar Agency
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Cedar City, Utah
El Paso, Texas
Flagstaff, Arizona
Las Vegas, Nevada
Phoenix, Arizona
Phoenix, Arizona
Tucson, Arizona
Yuma, Arizona
WSR- 88D 1 NWS
WSR- 88D NWS
WSR- 88D NWS
WSR- 88D NWS
WSR- 88D NWS
WSR- 88D NWS
TDWR 2 FAA
WSR- 88D NWS
WSR- 88D NWS
"°`~=~'==== e~ II=~= oI= I== III= e~ II==~ t=='`~=~''''''~=~ II== III= I= Ieoe~ I~°~''''= jooI='~'~°=== o
See Appendix A for acronym definitions.
Notes: 1. Weather Service Doppler Radar, 1988 model.
2. Terminal Doppler Weather Radar.
Sources: National Weather Service and FAA records, 1997.
NAVlGATIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 2- 40 Q~__.,]~
Figure 2- 2
EXISTING NEXRAD WEATHER RADAR COVERAGE
\ LAs
"*~. VEGAS
X RADAR
% \
CEDAR CITY
RADAR
+
#
I /
t /
!
!
+
GRAND
JUNCTION
RADAR
FLAGSTAFF
I- RADAR
ALBUQUERQUE
RADAR
+
YUMA
YUMA
4-
PHOENIX
RADAR
TUCSON • '~
TUCSON
RADAR EL PASO
RADAR
LEGEND
Area not covered
below 10,000 feet
above site level
" l~ NEXRAD site
/~'~ j~ Limit of coverage
SOURCE: National Weather Service, 1997
N
I I
1 inch = 80 n. m.
( approximate)
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
AFSS/ FSS Services
FAA AFSS and FSS facilities are a primary source of flight and weather
information available to pilots. Within Arizona, there is a single AFSS located at
the Ernest A. Love Field, Prescott. The AFSS provides pilots on the ground with
pre- flight briefings and serve pilots in the air with similar information and
services. One service provided by the AFSS is the dissemination of hazardous
inflight weather advisory service ( HIWAS) via the VHF omnidirectional radio
( VOR, VORTAC) facilities that provide navigational information to pilots. HIWAS
data are transmitted over these VORNORTAC facilities on an as required basis.
The broadcast is essentially line- of- sight and dependent on the altitude of the
aircraft and its avionics. The AFSS also receives pilot weather reports for
dissemination to other pilots, ARTCC, NWS and other AFSS/ FSS facilities.
The AFSS is supplemented by the FAA's direct user access terminal system
( DUATS). DUATS permits FAA- certified pilots with personal computers to
access weather briefing services ( surface observations, winds aloft,
temperatures aloft, terminal forecasts, pilot reports, and other nongraphic
weather products) and to file flight plans via FAA- selected vendors. By
redirecting the responsibility of these services to private contractors, the FAA
expects to satisfy the increasing demand for such services while maintaining
staffing levels. There is no charge to the pilot for the data and telephone call is
toll free. The vendors are compensated by the FAA based on the number of
calls received. Other on- line services to DUATS users include flight planning
prior to filing, graphic weather information, and airport facilities information.
These services are available for a fee. Pilots can also obtain weather data by
dialing 1- 800- WXBRIEF. This is a free service and telephone calls are routed to
the AFSS nearest to the caller. A menu select feature allows the caller to listen
to a pre- recorded weather summary via the telephone information briefing
services ( TIBS) or speak to a weather briefer at the AFSS.
Commercial Vendor Services
There are several vendors of surface weather condition information, weather
radar imagery, flight planning assistance and filing services that are available to
the aviation industry. Fixed base operators, corporate flight departments,
aviation training schools and individual pilots can subscribe to such services,
many of which are offered on a menu- style basis. A variety of such services is
provided at some airports in Arizona.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
2- 43
Communications Facilities
All State of Arizona agencies use voice and data communications in the conduct
of their activities. Voice transmission is managed by the Department of
Administration that leases telephone lines from one of several companies
operating in the State for use by State agencies with two exceptions. These are
the Department of Revenue and Department of Economic Security, which
operate on independent voice networks. Data communications are decentralized
with each State agency using separately leased or owned facilities to support
their operations. For the most part, these agency networks are not
interconnected and may be characterized as multiple parallel networks. For
example, two or more agencies in Phoenix may be contacting two or more
branch offices in Flagstaff and using separate data communications linkages
rather than a single data line which can then be switched to the desired branch
office. Most of these stand- alone networks use a star topology and the most
sophisticated of these is operated by the Arizona Department of Transportation.
Named TRANSNET, this wide area frame relay network relies on leased T1
( 1.544 mb/ s) lines from AT& T and US West to link principal offices in Phoenix,
Prescott, Tucson and Flagstaff to each other. These principal locations then are
linked to their associated local area network offices via other leased lines for the
transmission of data.
The Department of Administration has recognized the inefficiency of the existing
statewide voice and data communications system. In response, the State is
currently soliciting proposals from vendors to implement Project EAGLE for
Statewide communication services. The intent of Project EAGLE is to cause a
consolidation of these networks, reduce operating costs and encourage
economic development. The project does not envision that the State would own
and operate a communications system but rather serve as an anchor tenant
between a single communications services provider and the EAGLE alliance.
The initial EAGLE alliance participants are the three branches of Arizona State
government ( executive, legislative and judicial), community colleges, universities
and libraries within 155 Arizona communities. Communication services to be
provided include:
• Dedicated voice circuits
• Dedicated data services
• Packet- based services
• ISDN and xDSL services
• Cell- based services
• Voice value- added services
• Video value- added services
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY
2- 44
QED
• Messaging services
• Internetworking related services
• Management and monitoring services
• Billing services
• Reporting services
Eventually Project EAGLE will be expanded to include other political subdivisions
such as cities, counties and elementary/ middle/ high school districts.
When operational, Project EAGLE will enable a level of interconnectivity among
units of government that presently cannot be achieved. Further, the resulting
statewide communications services can support services that the Arizona
Department of Transportation and Aeronautics Division may seek to provide to
the aviation community.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
2- 45
FORECASTS OF AVIATION ACTIVITY
Introduction
This chapter examines the forecasts of aviation- related activity from two aviation
system plans and assesses the need to prepare new forecasts for use in this
study. The forecasts include registered pilots, registered aircraft and aircraft
operations. As part of this evaluation process, those factors that served as input
to and influenced the development of the earlier aviation projections were
reviewed. These include statewide socioeconomic characteristics, and local and
national trends in the aviation industry. The forecasts of annual activity were
then used to derive projections of peak- hour aircraft operations under instrument
flight rule ( IFR) procedures to assess demand versus capacity relationships.
Socioeconomic Characteristics
The forecasts of aviation activity presented in the 1995 State Aviation Needs
Study ( SANS) and 1996 Maricopa Association of Governments Regional
Aviation System Plan were reviewed for their continued validity. These forecasts
address registered pilots, based aircraft and general aviation activity. The
projections were predicated on population, employment and per capita income
measures as well as anticipated trends in the aviation industry. Significant
changes in the values of these independent socioeconomic variables and/ or
industry trends could result in a requirement for new projections.
A review of the socioeconomic data as forecast for 1995 and compared to actual
results led to the following conclusions:
. The actual population of Arizona in 1995 was 4,307,150 as compared to
the value of 4,134,925 used in the earlier aviation plans. The population
distribution among the 15 counties varied as well with some higher and
lower than that projected. Counties in the northeast portion of the State
actually experienced lower populations than those in the southwest,
northwest and Valley ( Maricopa County) regions when compared to the
levels used in the earlier studies.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
3- 1
. Rates of growth in population as presented in current State population
projections compared to those used previously indicate generally
comparable levels in most counties. Differences in growth rates occur in
the southeastern counties where growth rates are greater than earlier
projected. However, in terms of the number of persons, the differences
are slight. The Valley region had a higher population in 1995 than that
projected earlier, a difference of five percent. The higher growth rate now
anticipated for the Valley increases this difference by the year 2020 to
about nine percent. The Valley accounted for about 59 percent of the
State population in 1995; by 2020, this share will increase slightly to some
61 percent. These percentage shares are essentially the same as those
used as input to the previous aviation system planning studies.
. Employment levels in Arizona have been expanding at growth rates above
that of the nation and this trend is expected to continue in the future as
represented by the Arizona Department of Economic Security. This
scenario was similarly anticipated when the earlier projections of aviation
activity were prepared.
. Historical and forecast per capita income levels used in the previous
studies were presented in current 1994 values, but the basis for the
adjustment was not articulated. This results in an inability to directly
compare actual versus historical values, and projections then considered
and those now available. Nonetheless, current per capita income
projections indicate a continued increasing trend in dollar amounts, but at
values about 12 percent less than those anticipated for the United States.
In sum, the variances in the socioeconomic factors between the time the 1995
SANS and regional aviation system plan were developed and the present are not
significant to warrant a revision to the earlier forecasts presented. However, as
described below, there may be other factors that may indicate a need to present
new projections.
Registered Pilots
The 1995 SANS projections of registered pilots in Arizona for 1995 were nearly
20 percent less than the actual count as provided in FAA records - 13,072 versus
15,662. Within the groupings of general aviation, commercial and airline
transport pilots, some 60 percent of the difference can be attributed to the latter
sector. A revised projection of registered pilots by county was developed to
account for this variance using the most current FAA data available ( end of
calendar year 1997). The analysis considered historical trends in aviation activity
in Arizona and nationally, and an assessment of future potential directions.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
3- 2
Since 1990, all categories of registered pilots in Arizona have shown increases in
counts versus declines nationwide with the exception of the national number of
airline transport pilots which also grew in size. The 1995 SANS and FAA
projections during this period continued their respective trends. More recently,
the potential for growth in the general aviation sector has improved due to
industry promotions and the slightly delayed effect of product liability reform
legislation in 1994. This is reflected in the fiscal year 1998 FAA projections that
indicate growth in each of the pilot groupings through their forecast horizon to
fiscal year 2009. These projections show growth rates ranging from 0.6 percent
to 2.7 percent annually on average, with the higher growth applied to the general
aviation pilot category.
Historical growth patterns in Arizona aviation activity have been more positive
than those nationwide. The is due in large part to increasing general population
levels and the climate that is conducive to flight activity, particularly in the
southern half of the State. It was determined that each of the three pilot sectors
would continue to show gains in numbers. Average annual growth rates of 2.5
percent, 1.5 percent and 1.5 percent were applied to the general aviation,
commercial and airline transport groupings, respectively. These projections
indicate that the general aviation pilot sector will remain as the largest in terms of
number of pilots and account for a slightly increasing percentage of the total
registered pilot population over time, from 56 percent in 1997 to 61 percent by
the year 2015. The resulting forecasts are shown in Tables 3- 1 through 3- 4.
Balance of page left intentionally blank
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
3- 3
Table 3- I
REGISTERED GENERAL AVIATION PILOTS
Coun~
Apache
Cochise
Coconino
Gila
Graham
Greenlee
La Paz
Maricopa
Mohave
Navajo
Pima
Pinal
Santa Cruz
Yavapai
Yuma
Unknown
Total
Actual
1997
23
284
251
70
22
9
38
5,888
334
76
t, 498
155
40
576
153
9
9,426
2000
25
306
270
75
24
10
41
6,341
36O
82
1,613
167
43
620
165
I0
10,512
Forecast
2005
28
346
306
85
27
11
46
7,174
407
93
1,825
189
49
702
186
11
11,485
2010
32
391
346
96
30
12
52
8,117
460
105
2,065
214
55
794
211
12
12,292
2015
36
443
391
109
34
14
59
9,183
521
119
2,336
242
62
898
239
14
14,700
• o . . . . , , , . o , . o , o , , ° . . , . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . ° . , . . , , , , , , ° . ° , ° ° ° ° . , , , . . . . . . ° o . , , ° . , , , ,
Sources: U. S. Civil Airmen Statistics, FAA, December 31, 1997.
QED for forecast years.
NA VlGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 3- 4 QE]~
Table 3- 2
REGISTERED COMMERCIAL PILOTS
County
Apache
Cochise
Coconino
Gila
Graham
Greenlee
La Paz
Maricopa
Mohave
Navajo
Pima
Pinal
Santa Cruz
Yavapai
Yuma
Unknown
Total
Actual
1997
6
96
108
27
11
5
16
1,891
93
29
584
64
13
271
96
1
3,311
Forecast
2000
6
100
113
28
12
5
17
1,977
97
30
611
67
14
283
100
1
3,461
2005
7
108
122
30
12
6
18
2,130
105
33
658
72
16
305
108
1
3,730
2010
7
117
131
33
13
6
19
2,295
113
35
709
78
16
329
117
1
4,019
2015
8
126
141
35
14
7
21
2,472
122
38
763
84
17
354
126
1
4,329
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o
Sources: U. S. Civil Airmen Statistics, FAA, December 31, 1997.
QED for forecast years.
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 3- 5 Q ~__:,]~
Table 3- 3
REGISTERED AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOTS
Coun~
Apache
Cochise
Coconino
Gila
Graham
Greenlee
La Paz
Maricopa
Mohave
Navajo
Pima
Pinal
Santa Cruz
Yavapal
Yuma
Unknown
Total
Actual
1997
5
49
76
18
4
2,931
48
17
554
32
9
176
70
3
3,992
2000
5
51
79
19
O
0
4
3,065
50
18
579
33
9
184
73
3
4,172
Forecast
2005
6
55
86
20
0
0
5
3,302
54
19
624
36
10
198
79
3
4,497
2010
6
59
92
22
0
0
5
3,557
58
21
672
39
11
214
85
4
4,845
2015
7
64
99
24
O
0
5
3,832
63
22
724
42
12
230
92
4
5,220
• .°, . . . . . . . . . . . . ° ° ° ° o , , , , . . o , ° o o , , , . . . . . . . o . , . . . . o . , , , , ° ° ° ° . ° , o , . o o o . ° o o ° , ° ° ° , ° ,
Sources: U. S. Civil Airmen Statistics, FAA, December 3t, 1997.
QED for forecast years.
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 3- 8 QE,]~
Table 3- 4
TOTAL REGISTERED PILOTS
County
Apache
Cochise
Coconino
Gila
Graham
Greenlee
La Paz
Maricopa
Mohave
Navajo
Pima
Pinal
Santa Cruz
Yavapai
Yuma
Unknown
Total
Actual
1997
34
429
435
115
33
14
58
10,710
475
122
2,636
251
62
1,023
319
13
16,729
Forecast
2000
36
457
462
122
36
15
62
11,383
507
130
2,803
267
66
1,087
338
14
17,785
2005
41
509
514
135
39
17
69
12,606
566
145
3,107
297
74
1,205
373
15
19,712
2010
45
567
569
151
43
18
76
13,969
631
161
3,446
331
82
1,337
413
17
21,856
2015
51
633
631
168
48
39
85
15,487
706
179
3,823
368
91
1,482
232
19
24,042
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . °,
Sources: U. S. Civil Airmen Statistics, FAA, December 31, 1997
QED for forecast years.
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUBY 3- 7 Q~_, D
Registered Aircraft
The 1995 SANS projected a 1995 estimate of 6,105 registered aircraft in
Arizona. Records available from the ADOT Aeronautics indicate that the actual
count was 5,076. The difference is due in large part to a change in aircraft
registration regulations and fees in Arizona, which served to distinguish between
airworthy aircraft and those no longer in use. The latter aircraft are not included
in the 5,076 count.
Although most pilots indicated a base location for their aircraft when registering,
thus enabling a listing of aircraft by county, some were without such designation.
These aircraft, representing about five percent of the total, were proportionately
allocated to each county. Future levels of Arizona active registered aircraft were
determined based on average annual growth rates and percentage allocations
utilized in preparing the 1995 SANS. The resulting projections are presented in
Table 3- 5.
Balance of page left intentionally blank
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
3- 8
Table 3- 5
TOTAL REGISTERED AIRCRAFT
County
Apache
Cochise
Coconino
Gila
Graham
Greenlee
La Paz
Maricopa
Mohave
Navajo
Pima
Pinal
Santa Cruz
Yavapai
Yuma
Total
Actual
1995
27
128
149
54
35
2
43
2,796
208
82
748
245
17
398
144
5,076
2000
30
138
165
57
39
2
44
2,951
238
88
893
266
19
451
161
5,542
Forecast
2005
32
148
181
59
43
2
47
3,165
269
94
1,021
287
21
511
177
6,057
2010
35
158
196
62
45
2
51
3,398
301
100
1,078
307
23
574
193
6,523
2015
38
167
210
64
47
2
54
3,650
331
107
1,171
326
25
636
210
7,038
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o,. . . . . . . .
Source: 1995 State Aviation Needs Study.
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA nON SERVICES SPECIAL STUD Y 3- 9 Q F.]~
General Aviation Activity
In the early and mid- 1990' s, growth in general aviation activity was viewed with
guarded optimism. This was due primarily to the cost of flying which increased
more rapidly than the cost of living, and to issues related to tort liability for aircraft
manufacturers. The forecasts presented in the 1995 SANS indicate a slightly
increasing growth rate, about 1.8 percent annually statewide over a 20- year
period. Relatively higher growth rates were projected for the northwestern
counties ( 2.8 percent) with those in the southeastern counties reflecting an
average annual growth rate of 1.1 percent. The Valley region was expected to
realize growth at a rate of 1.7 percent annually on average. Comparatively, the
average annual growth rate projected in 1995 by the FAA for general aviation
activity in the country was some 0.9 percent for an 11- year period. Current
national projections of general aviation activity by the FAA indicate an average
annual growth rate of 0.7 percent. Although these projections reflect a more
positive outlook for general aviation than in years past, they place a higher
emphasis on business corporate flight activity and the use of more sophisticated
multi- engine aircraft including jets.
The process by which the 1995 SANS forecasts of general aviation activity were
derived reflects an industry- accepted methodology employing the use of
regression analysis. The measures of population, employment and income used
continue to be valid with comparable growth rates and characteristics Statewide
and by county and region. Aircraft operations growth rate levels used in the
earlier projections were higher than those applied to generate nationwide
forecasts both in 1995 and those currently in use, thus reflecting the higher
propensity to fly in good weather climates. Overall, it appears that the
projections shown in the 1995 SANS and 1996 regional aviation study remain
valid for continued application. These forecasts are presented in Table 3- 6.
Balance of page left intentionally blank
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
3- 10
Table 3- 6
GENERAL AVIATION AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
County
Apache
Cochise
Actual Forecast
Airport
Chinle
Ganado
Greasewood ( Closed)
Lukachukai
Pine Springs
Rock Point
Springerville Babbit Field
St. Johns Industrial Park
Toyei School ( Closed)
Window Rock
Benson Municipal ( New)
Bisbee Douglas International
Bisbee Municipal
Bowie
Cochise College
Cochise County
Douglas Municipal
Libby AAF I Sierra Vista
Tombstone Municipal
1995
2,703
108
108
108
65
324
6,486
4,108
22
5,045
°
1,946
7,610
60O
59,455
7,243
7,459
21,131
216
2000
2,703
108
108
108
65
324
7,027
4,108
22
7,567
800
1,946
8,245
800
59,455
7,800
7,459
23,112
216
2005
2,703
108
108
108
65
324
7,567
4,108
22
7,567
1,200
2,141
8,879
8OO
59,455
8,357
7,832
23,773
216
2010
8,109
108
108
108
65
324
7,567
4,519
22
7,567
1,600
2,335
9,513
1,000
59,455
8,636
7,832
27,075
216
2015
8,109
108
108
108
65
324
8,108
4,930
22
10,089
1,800
2,530
10,147
1,000
59,455
8,914
8,205
29,056
216
NA VIGA TIONAL AIOS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUD Y 3- 11 Q ~_:.~]~
County
Coconino
Gila
Table 3- 6
GENERAL AVIATION AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
Airport
Cliff Dwellers Lodge
Flagstaff- Pulllam
Grand Canyon National Park
H. A. Clark Memorial
Marble Canyon
Page Municipal
Tuba City
Globe- San Carlos Regional
Payson
Pleasant Valley International
San Carlos
Actual Forecast
1995
200
52,946
2,378
216
2,838
15,742
6,486
5,528
22,723
200
2,500
200
59,102
2,594
216
3,405
17,358
6,486
5,791
23,670
200
3,000
200
48,020
2,162
216
2,270
14,127
6,486
5,264
21,776
200
2,000
2000 2005 2010
200
64,643
2,702
216
3,405
18,971
6,486
5,791
25,563
200
4,000
2015
200
69,568
3,027
216
3,405
20,585
6,486
6,054
26,510
200
5,000
Graham Safford Regional 16,564 17,632 19,235 20,304 21,907
Greenlee Duncan- O'Connor Field ( Closed) 1,300 1,700 2,000 2,500
Greenlee County 3,784 3,784 3,784 3,784 3,784
La Paz Avi Suquilla 25,404 25,404 26,381 27,358 28,335
Quartzsite ( New) 1,000 1,400 2,000 2,400
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 3- 12 QE~]~
Table 3- 6
GENERAL AVIATION AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
Actual Forecast
County
Maricopa
Mohave
Airport
Buckeye Municipal
Chandler Municipal
Gila Bend Municipal
Glendale Municipal
Memorial Airfield 1
Mesa- Falcon Field
Phoenix- Deer Valley
Phoenix- Goodyear
Phoenix Sky Harbor Int'l
Scottsdale
Stellar Airpark
Wickenburg Municipal
Williams Gateway
Colorado City
Grand Canyon Bar- Ten
Grand Canyon Caverns
Grand Canyon West
Hualapai Tribal
Kingman
Lake Havasu City Municipal
Laughlin / Bullhead City
Pearce Ferry
Sun Valley
Temple Bar
Tuweep
1995
47,000
189,000
12,800
167,500
2,300
202,300
296,400
222,000
92,066
271,300
52,200
17,800
37,600
865
2OO
200
200
20O
28,961
34,364
93,370
2OO
200
3,026
2OO
2000
62,500
200,600
13,600
185,800
4,100
213,700
316,100
242,700
85,358
278,200
53,800
19,400
75,800
865
200
2O0
2O0
20O
31,374
39,651
118,420
200
200
3,026
20O
2005
81,800
212,900
14,500
206,200
7,600
255,700
337,200
265,400
78,500
285,200
55,400
21,100
95,300
2010
107,200
226,000
15,400
228,700
13,800
238,300
359,700
280,100
73,000
292,400
57,100
23,000
128,500
1,298
20O
2OO
20O
400
33,184
43,805
138,916
200
20O
3,026
2OO
1,298
200
2O0
200
1,000
34,391
48,336
163,967
2O0
200
3,026
200
2015
140,600
242,000
16,300
253,300
25,100
252,200
386,100
313,700
68,000
300,000
58,100
25,000
159,500
1,514
200
2OO
400
2,000
35,598
51,735
179,908
400
200
4,539
20O
Note: 1. Airport was closed to aircraft In 1997 and forecast operations may not reach these levels. Airport continues to be used for practice approaches.
NA VlGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUD Y 3- 13 Q~__:,]~
Table 3- 6
GENERAL AVIATION AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
County
Navajo
Pima
Airport
Holbrook Municipal
Kayenta
Low Mountain ( Closed)
Pinon
Polacca
Rocky Ridge
Shonto
Show Low Municipal
Taylor Municipal
Whlteriver
Winslow Municipal
AJo Municipal
Avra Valley
Flying J Ranch
Ryan Airfield
Sells
Tucson International
Actual
1995
973
4,000
200
200
200
200
200
13,837
3,784
1,730
20,539
1,022
4,000
200
200
200
200
200
15,374
4,099
1,730
20,539
1,800
34,200
200
46,200
200
80,200
1,070
4,000
200
2O0
20O
200
20O
16,912
4,730
1,730
20,539
2,000
36,800
200
49,800
200
86,400
1,600
30,200
200
41,000
200
71,000
2000
1,070
4,000
200
200
200
200
200
19,218
5,045
1,730
22,119
2,200
39,200
200
53,200
200
92,200
Fo~ cast
2005 2010 2015
1,119
4,000
200
200
200
200
200
20,756
5,045
1,730
22,119
2,400
41,800
200
56,800
400
98,400
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 3- 14 Q~___, D
Table 3- 6
GENERAL AVIATION AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
C o u n ~
Pinal
Santa Cruz
Yavapai
Yuma
Airport
Ak Chin Community
Casa Grande Municipal
Coolidge Municipal
Eloy Municipal
Estrella Sailport
Kearny
Pinal Airpark
San Manuel
Superior
Nogales International
Bagdad
Cordes lake ( New)
Cottonwood Municipal
Ernest A. Love Field
Sedona
Seligman
Rolle Field
Yuma International
Actual
1995
400
86,974
8,513
24,623
72,968
5,318
8,980
1,390
216
3,695
18,626
18,354
293,082
16,677
200
200
89,862
2000
4O0
92,904
9,459
26,424
78,373
5,318
9,653
1,544
648
4,223
23,283
2,000
20,489
330,903
18,786
400
200
99,540
Forecast
2005
600
100,811
10,405
28,226
83,778
7,091
10,214
1,699
648
4,761
29,104
3,000
23,903
370,142
21,278
600
200
109,908
2010
600
106,741
11,351
30,028
88,282
8,864
10,888
1,853
864
5,279
37,253
4,700
27,318
411,831
23,578
800
200
119,586
2015
8OO
108,718
12,296
31,229
92,786
10,637
11,449
2,008
1,080
5,807
44,238
6,000
30,306
450,993
26,262
1,000
200
129,263
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ° . . . . . . ° . . . . . . . . . . . o . . . . . . . . o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ° . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ° . . . . . . . . . . .
Sources: 1995 State Aviation Needs Study.
1996 Maricopa Association of Governments Regional Aviation System Plan.
NA VIGA TIONAL A IDS AND A VIA TION SER VICES SPECIA L STUD Y 3- 15 Q'F~ ]~
IFR Peak- Hour Aircraft Operations
Forecasts of IFR peak- hour aircraft operations were generated from the
projections of total activity as presented in Table 3- 6. The forecast process
derives estimates of instrument operations based on a methodology developed
for the FAA in the report, " An Improved Forecast Model for Annual Instrument
Approaches". The translation of annual aircraft operations into annual
instrument operations takes into consideration the extent of itinerant aircraft
activity at the airport as identified in airport- or aviation- specific studies and the
use of IFR flight plans. The latter was anticipated to increase over time as more
pilots become IFR- rated. Adjustments to the data presented in Table 3- 6 were
made to account for airports with scheduled aircraft service.
IFR peak- hour aircraft operations were based on a planning factor that activity
during the peak- hour is 3 times the average hourly activity measured during a
16- hour day. This factor was based on the experience and judgement of QED.
The resultant values, as presented in Table 3- 7, were determined to be
reasonable and appropriate for use in this study. In many cases, a nominal
value of one IFR peak- hour aircraft operation was assigned. This accounts for
those airports, with or without an instrument approach procedure, that can serve
as a point of departure for access to the IFR operating environment.
IFR Peak- Hour Capacity
IFR peak- hour capacities for each system airport are also presented in Table 3- 7
for convenience of comparison. The capacities reflect existing airport situations
whereas the forecasts shown are for the year 2015, reflecting a conservative
view. The capacities were based on the extent and type of instrument
approaches at each airport, the availability of an approach
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
3- 16
Table 3- 7
IFR PEAK- HOUR DEMAND / CAPACITY
Coun~
Apache
Cochise
Airport
Chinle
Ganado
Greasewood ( Closed)
Lukachukai
Pine Springs
Rock Point
Springerville Babbit Field
St, Johns Industrial Park
Toyei School ( Closed)
Window Rock
Benson Municipal ( New)
Bisbee Douglas International
Bisbee Municipal
Bowie
Cochise College
Cochise County
Douglas Municipal
Libby AAF I Sierra Vista
Tombstone Municipal
IFR Peak- Hour
Demand Capaci~
3
3
3
3
3
3
10
5
3
10
5
10
3
3
3
10
3
30
3
Coun~
Coconino
Gila
Airport
Cliff Dwellers Lodge
Flagstaff- Pulliam
Grand Canyon National Park
H. A. Clark Memorial
Marble Canyon
Page Municipal
Tuba City
Globe- San Carlos Regional
Payson
Pleasant Valley International
San Carlos
IFR Peak- Hour
Demand Capaci~
1
10
1
1
1
2
1
3
25
25
3
3
10
3
Graham Safford Regional 1 3
Greenlee Duncan- O'Connor Field ( Closed] 1 3
Greenlee County 1 3
NA VlGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUD Y 3.17 Q E E)
County
La Paz
Maricopa
Table 3- 7
IFR PEAK- HOUR DEMAND I CAPACITY
Airport
Avi Suquilla
Quartzsite ( New)
Buckeye Municipal
Chandler Municipal
Gila Bend Municipal
Glendale Municipal
Memorial Airfield
Mesa- Falcon Field
Phoenix- Deer Valley
Phoenix- Goodyear
Phoenix Sky Harbor Int'l
Scottsdale
Stellar Airpark
Wickenburg Municipal
Williams Gateway
IFR Peak. Hour
Demand Capacity
2 5
1 10
8 3
10 10
1 3
9 3
2 3
10 15
14 15
14 3
72 90
17 20
3 3
1 3
9 40
County
Mohave
Navajo
Airport
Colorado City
Grand Canyon Bar- Ten
Grand Canyon Caverns
Grand Canyon West
Hualapai Tribal
Kingman
Lake Havasu City Municipal
Laughlin I Bullhead City
Pearce Ferry
Sun Valley
Temple Bar
Tuweep
Holbrook Municipal
Kayenta
Low Mountain ( Closed)
Pinon
Polacca
Rocky Ridge
Shonto
Show Low Municipal
Taylor Municipal
Whiteriver
Winslow Municipal
IFR Peak- Hour
Demand
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
13
1
1
1
1
Capaci~
5
3
3
3
10
10
15
10
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
10
NAVIGATIONAL AIOS ANO AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUOY 3.18 QED
Table 3- 7
IFR PEAK- HOUR DEMAND I CAPACITY
County
Pima
Pinal
IFR Peak- Hour
Airport
Ajo Municipal
Avra Valley
Flying J Ranch
Ryan Airfield
Sells
Tucson International
Ak Chin Community
Casa Grande Municipal
Coolidge Municipal
Eloy Municipal
Estrella Sailport
Kearny
Pinal Airpark
San Manuel
Superior Municipal
Demand Capacity
1
2
1
2
1
18
3
3
3
20
3
50
3
20
10
3
1
1
3
3
1
County
Santa Cruz
Yavapai
IFR Peak- Hour
Airport
Nogales International
Bagdad
Cordes Lake ( New)
Cottonwood Municipal
Ernest A. Love Field
Sedona
Seligman
Demand
3
1
1
12
2
1
Capacity
5
3
10
3
50
5
3
Yuma Rolle Field 1 3
Yuma International 8 50
Source: QED.
NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS AND A VIA TION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY 3- t 9 Q~__,~ D
TECHNOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Introduction
The Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA) is responsible for providing the
infrastructure to operate, maintain and improve the air traffic control system and
otherwise manage the airspace system within the United States. Although these
responsibilities represent just one area of the FAA's charge, they are the primary
focus of those issues related to this study. The FAA is presently examining its
mission and means to best provide for continued management of the airspace
infrastructure. Terms such as communications/ navigation/ surveillance ( CNS)
and air traffic management ( ATM) are mentioned with increasing regularity within
the aviation industry. These elements have an impact on future actions in which
a state aviation agency may elect to participate. The following sections are
intended to highlight principal issues with respect to CNS/ ATM and aviation
support services to provide a basis for establishing and maintaining future
navigational aids and services in Arizona.
Navigation
. The introduction of global positioning system ( GPS) technology for civilian
aviation use in February 1994 ushered in a new mind set with respect to air
navigation. Although the United States Department of Defense forces have
used GPS since 1973, it was not until early 1994 that the technology was
made available for civilian aviation applications. Three major driving forces
supported this transition:
1. A need to maximize the existing air navigation facilities system.
2. Demands to reduce the cost of operating and maintaining the existing
navigation system.
3. Desires to further enhance aviation safety and capacity.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
4- 1
GPS is the United States' response to the International Civil Aviation
Organization ( ICAO) challenge of developing a primary stand- alone navigation
capability through a global navigation satellite system ( GNSS). GNSS builds on
the United States GPS, Russian global orbiting navigation satellite system
( GLONASS) and other satellite systems, as they become available. Other such
systems include, for example, the European geostationary navigation overlay
system ( EGNOS) which is the European counterpart to WAAS ( see below).
Essentially, GPS, GLONASS and other such systems use earth- orbiting
satellites positioned in different orbital planes, which radiate precisely timed
signals of code and navigation data. The signals are received by airborne
aircraft to calculate a three- dimensional position ( latitude, longitude and altitude).
The GPS receiver in the aircraft typically acquires positioning data from between
four and eight satellites and selects at least those four which best enable a
computation of the aircraft's position. As one satellite moves from view of the
aircraft receiver, a new satellite should become visible so that the receiver
continues to monitor and compute its position. Ground reference stations also
receive GPS satellite positioning data and because the location of these stations
is precisely known, can detect errors in the satellite positioning data stream.
Corrections are then uplinked to geostationary satellites that transmit the
corrections to the aircraft GPS receivers.
Due to the evolutionary impact GPS has on aviation, the FAA has embarked on
a deliberate program to introduce the available and planned technology in a
measured fashion. An initial step was the establishment of TSO- C129, " Airborne
Supplemental Navigation Equipment Using the Global Positioning System
( GPS)" which enabled civilian use of GPS in instrument flight rule ( IFR)
procedures for en route, terminal and nonprecision approaches. Depending
upon the classification of the TS0- C129 GPS equipment installed in the aircraft
and whether it transmits data to an integrated navigation system such as flight
management system which provides enhanced guidance to an autopilot or flight
director in order to reduce flight technical errors, pilots can utilize GPS for
oceanic, en route, terminal and nonprecision approaches except those based on
procedures using Iocalizer ( LOC), Iocalizer- type directional aid ( LDA), or
simplified directional facility ( SDF) equipment. A basic requirement is that the
GPS equipment provide the receiver autonomous integrity monitoring ( RAIM) for
the procedure intended. RAIM involves the use of redundant measurements to
test the validity of the received signals. RAIM obtains positioning data from at
least four satellites visible to the aircraft in order to select those most appropriate
for calculating the position of the aircraft. RAIM provides an integrity capability,
but reduces the availability because the system is available only when redundant
satellites are in view in an acceptable geometry. Should one or more satellites
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
4- 2
be malfunctioning, RAIM could not provide the reliability for navigation. When
RAIM is not provided, the aircraft must fly the ground- based navigational aids
( NAVAIDS) which are used to establish the procedures. This applies to flights to
the destination airport. Any required alternate airport must have an approved
instrument procedure and the aircraft must be able to navigate to that alternate
using means other than those provided by GPS or long range navigation- C
system ( LORAN- C). These same regulations apply to stand- alone nonprecision
GPS approach procedures.
International standards associated with civilian aviation navigation are developed
by ICAO of which the FAA is an active participant. Additionally, the RTCA, Inc.,
an association of aeronautical organizations of the United States government
and industry provides technical assistance in defining these standards. A
principal output of this collaborative effort is the required navigation performance
( RNP) for all phases of flight. RNP defines the navigation performance accuracy
necessary for operation within a defined airspace. Measures of RNP include
accuracy, integrity, availability and continuity. Accuracy is the degree of
conformance of an aircraft's measured position with its true position. Integrity is
the ability to provide timely warnings when part or all of the system is providing
erroneous information and thus should not be used for navigation. Availability is
the probability that at any time the system will meet the accuracy and integrity
requirements for a specific phase of flight. Continuity is the probability that a
service will continue to be available for a specified period of time and is of
concern primarily in the approach phase of flight.
Because GPS with RAIM or an integrated navigation system to provide RAIM-equivalent
capability cannot meet the RNP for precision approaches, the FAA is
implementing a wide area augmentation system ( WAAS) to permit Category I
approaches ( ceiling as low as 200 feet and visibility as low as ½ - mile).
Standards for a local area augmentation system ( LAAS) are being readied to
provide Category II/ 111 approach capabilities. WAAS is intended to operate in the
following sequence of events, which requires about six seconds of time:
. The GPS satellite data is received at one of the 24 ( initial) to 36
( future) wide area ground reference stations precisely located
throughout the United States.
. This data is transmitted over landlines to one or two wide area master
stations that determine the integrity, differential corrections, residual
error and ionospheric information for each monitored satellite.
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
4- 3
. The wide area corrections computed at the master station are then
sent via landlines to a ground earth station which uplinks the message
to one of several geostationary communications satellites.
4. The geostationary satellite then downloads this data to the WAAS
receiver on the aircraft.
. The WAAS receiver processes the integrity data to ensure that the
satellites being used are providing in- tolerance data; applies the
differential correction and ionoshperic information data to improve the
accuracy of the aircraft's position solution; and processes the ranging
data from one or more of the geostationary satellites for position
determination.
WAAS meets the RNP for Category I precision approaches. However, a finer
level of augmentation is necessary to comply with Category II/ 11 RNP standards.
LAAS is being designed to achieve this capability. Whereas WAAS can be
considered a centralized approach in which data from the reference station is
sent to a central location for processing and corrections are broadcast through
communications satellites, LAAS is a distributed approach with ground stations
close to the airport to which the approach is being conducted. These locations
provide positioning corrections that are specific to the point of use at the airport
and reduce the time for data link transmissions to the receiver in the aircraft
which is coupled to the aircraft's flight management system, thereby providing
greater accuracy on approach.
Interestingly, WAAS corrections are applicable at grid points and must be
interpolated by aircraft software to produce the requisite positioning accuracies.
The interpolation algorithms needed to compute location- specific corrections
result in high complexity for airborne and ground software with attendant
development and certification risks. This large software development effort also
has attendant schedule risk. LAAS is a simpler technology and eliminates the
need for external processing or satellite communications links. LAAS has moved
more quickly into production development with several manufacturers providing
the equipment. However, the FAA has yet to establish the final performance
standards for LAAS and, thus, those systems being marketed will also serve as
test centers for the FAA in their standard- setting process. The primary debate
on standards is related to the choice of data link from the ground station to the
aircraft receiver. In practice today, these pre- LAAS systems are actually
established as differential GPS Special Category I Systems ( SCAT- I). SCAT- I is
normally developed as a private- use facility, but to not less than Category I
minimums. Minimum aviation system performance standards ( MASPS) have
NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND AVIATION SERVICES SPECIAL STUDY QED
4- 4
been defined by FAA and RTCA for SCAT- I application. SCAT- I systems are
certified in accordance with Federal Aviation Regulations Part 171, Non- Federal
Navigation Facilities. This requires that special authorization, equipment and/ or
trainin