The Evaluation of an Airport Model - Report Example

EVALUATION OF AN AIRPORT MODEL Tutor: Submitted by: Submission date Table of Contents Executive summary 3 Introduction 3 Evaluation, Purpose and Evaluation Questions 4 Evaluation purpose 4 Evaluation questions 5 Design, Methods and Limitations 6 Risk assessment 6 Assessment of the runway 8 Assessment of pavements 8 Other necessary additional modifications 9 Conclusion 11 Recommendations 11 The theoretic concept in the design that I found challenging 13 References 16 Executive summary This report provides an evaluation of an existing design of an airport. The design is presented in the form of a multimodal text, and it shows the expected layout. Also, the design aircraft is included in the multimodal text. The evaluation is aimed at improving the design. The report gives an analysis of the design and cites the possible modifications in order to enhance its effectiveness. The evaluation will be based on theories and the metafunction framework that is provided in the course. The evaluation process will highly consider safety as a key factor. However, other necessary conditions such as efficiency and cost will be considered. Introduction An airport can be viewed as a multifunction of distributed system that which is a part of a much larger system. It can be thought as a small unit surrounded by a dynamic network that comprises of all the source of cargo and the passengers who get in and out of the airport. But this is only the ground system; a huge number of these systems are interconnected so that they for a huge network of communication. Some of the systems include the road networks, the apron, car parking, runway, etc. For the purpose of safety, airports are usually laid in a standard manner. An airport that is well designed should offer safe maneuvering, proper clearance and efficient. Any airport facility is usually designed basing on various different factors. The design can be categorized into, airside facility and landside facility. The landside facility includes structures such as fixed base operator facility, hangars, aircraft parking, surface access, aircraft fueling and automobile parking. An evaluation process is, therefore, important so as to identify the adequacy as well as the inadequacy of an existing facility and identify any new facility that might be added. Evaluation of airfield objects is done, and its arrangements done with consideration of the Federal Aviation Administration standards. The airfield capacity, for instance, is an important consideration since it provides a way of properly planning the location of structures as well as the space to be assigned to each portion. Airport design also considers other structures such as runway and the pavement. A runway, for instance, should be located in an area free from any obstacles or potholes. Evaluation, Purpose and Evaluation Questions Evaluation purpose The main purpose of this report is to come up with relevant solutions for improving a suggested model of an airport. The evaluation considers all the sections of the airport that includes; airside facilities, terminal facilities, and landside facilities. The evaluation, therefore, is to ensure that the multimodal text meets the standard requirements of an airport. The need for an effective and convenient layout of structures is important. These structures include the runway, roads, car parking, etc. Evaluation questions The questions to answer in this design are; 1. What is the expected capacity of the airport? 2. What are the sizes of airplanes is the airport expected to accommodate? 3. Do the runways meet the required standards? 4. Are the airfield pavements properly designed and what is its rating in terms of its design? 5. Are the available taxiways effectively chosen so as to offer easy access either to the apron and the runways? 6. Is the parking of aircrafts located in convenient places? 7. How is the vehicle parking placed in the layout and does it offer the most efficient accessibility to both the road and the airport area? Design, Methods and Limitations Risk assessment Below is an assessment of the model using binding and unbinding theory. The binding and unbinding theory usually assesses a space in terms of weather it is too bound or unbound and how it relates to the security of the space. The current airport model meets most of the risk considerations. However, the entrance to the airplane parking needs to be redesigned. The entrance is so narrow and thus poses a risk to the airplanes as they enter. Although it can still allow for movements, it still can be termed as a unbound space. The entire entrance side, therefore, needs to be re-designed. The airport model can be viewed as the model below Fig: describing the binding scale for security choices This airport model falls in between the two cases. It is however necessary that some modifications are made on the design so that the airport feels comfortable and safe to the users. The design applies the permeability and ambience concept. This involves creating of round abouts inside the airplane side. Also the entrance is opened up to create more space and this improves safety of the planes as they enter the air plane area. Other modifications include; 1. Arranging the aprons in a perpendicular manner to the runway. This will allow airplanes to easily access them. These aprons can be created all around the parking area. 2. Making the aprons accessible from the rear side. This will make easy accessibility for unloading purposes. 3. The inclusion of hangars on the opposite side to offer parking for private, commercial or business relates purposes. The hangers should, therefore, be safely and should allow the aircraft maintain a safe distance. 4. Additional extension of the road networks. 5. Redesign of access points on the basis of standard traffic patterns for airplanes (i.e., Left-hand patterns) (KAZDA, et.al, 2007). 6. Inclusion of a wall all around the airport only leaving the entrance points as in the attached diagram. This makes the premise safer including the passengers. These modifications are aimed at making the area penetrable as required by the bound and unbound theory. Assessment of the runway After conducting research on the requirements of a runway, the factors to be considered include; The above-suggested modifications will ease up the congestions at the airport, and it will thus be necessary to modify the run. The modification I find suitable is using a parallel highway system. The parallel highway system will mean a modification on the entrance. The distance between the separations should be minimized as much as possible so as to allow flexibility for future expansions and modification. The use parallel runway will ensure that airplanes will arrive and departure more conveniently (ASHFORD, et.al. 2011) Assessment of pavements The pavements of the aprons should be designed so as to handle the designated aircrafts. The materials for it construction needs to be asphalt concrete. The pavements should be designed basing on; The expected lifespan, maintenance requirements, surface damage resistance from fuel spills, resistance to the exerted load and the influence on any aircraft support equipment such as boarding bridges (UFFELEN, 2012). Other necessary additional modifications Taxiway turn rounds-the inclusion of taxi turn rounds may be an alternative to the parallel taxiway. This will, therefore, minimize congestion. Provision of drainage structures along the highway will be necessary. The addition of holding bays outside the airport can also be included in the design. As observed from the figure, there is available space on the sides of the entrance as a result of the broad road into the parallel runways. Bays will act as alternative parking in the case where all the aprons are occupied. It, however, utilizes the space that could otherwise be wasted. This space can, therefore, be designated for commercial aircrafts that could not fit in the aprons. Inclusion of airport gates at the access points in between the aircrafts and the terminals where the passengers usually board or alight from the aircraft. These gates can either be on a ground or a higher level a loading bridge may, however, be necessary to include. The diagram below however summarizes the final expected design basing on the discussed evaluations. Fig: a sketch showing the suggested airport design. Conclusion This study has in detail analyzed the current airport design if it meets the required standards. The evaluation is done majorly basing on the safety and accessibility. Having an easily accessible and safe airport sums up to an efficient airport. This evaluation, therefore, leads to some suggestions concerning the design. For instance, it is noted that, the entire design needs some modifications on its accessibility networks. An additional road network will be necessary considering that the aprons will have a rear access entrance. The airplane parking is not easily accessible in the current design and therefore redesigning of the entrance is recommended. The study also evaluates the pavement designs and the materials for pavement construction. From this study, it is clear that the assessed model does not fully meet the standards, and it should be re-designed basing on the suggestions. With proper implementation, the airport layout will, therefore, offer effective movements of airplanes, vehicles and passengers and in a much safer environment. Recommendations 1. Accessibility networks The current design has a road network system that might limit movements within the airport area thus causing congestion. It is recommended that more accessibility networks are created. 2. Pavement materials The pavement material should be rigid enough. It is recommended that asphalt concrete should be used for pavement construction 3. Entrance The entrance point to the air plane area is so narrow in the current design and it is recommended that it is opened up and made to be wider. The theoretic concept in the design that I found challenging The theoretic part that I found challenging is the incorporation of a parallel highway system on the runway. The current airport design is based on a single way runway. This concept is however challenging is the sense that, it will mean modification of the entrance point and other related layout features. According to (NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL, 2012), the concept of the parallel highway system has not been widely implemented in such a closed type airport design. According to research that I conducted, this design has been used in the San Francisco International airport although its design is far unrelated to this case. In fact, the San Francisco airport is located in an open wide space including the airplane parking. This explains why this concept is somehow unique and challenging. The idea was to ease up on any possible congestion that could be caused by moving in and out of airplanes. A single runway could mean that one airplane can operate at a time. With this consideration in mind, the idea then came up. This could then be challenging. The concept is further challenging considering that, any implementation on the airport can allow for future expansions. To solve this, the two runways will be set far apart to leave a space at the center that could be in future be utilized. The entrance point would, therefore, need to be completely opened up to one huge road that links into the parallel runways. Another issue that emerges is whether it could allow two airplanes to enter or leave the airport at the same time. With the current design, this could not be possible. I, however, managed to tackle the challenge and come up with an effective design. References Ashford, N., Mumayiz, S. A., & Wright, P. H. (2011). Airport engineering design, planning, and development of 21st century airports. Hoboken, N.J., Wiley. http://www.123library.org/book_details/?id=16825. Kazda, A., & Caves, R. E. (2007). Airport design and operation. Amsterdam, Elsevier. http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=649116. Leighfisher (Firm), Landrum & Brown, National Research Council (U.S.), Airport Cooperative Research Program, & United States. (2012). Evaluating Airfield Capacity. Acrp Report. Washington, D.C., Transportation Research Board. Turner, D. W. (2001). New concepts in airport planning and design. Economics of Air Transportation. Uffelen, C. V. (2012). Airports architecture. [S.l.], Braun. Read More