Slipperly glideslope to LAX expansion?

I am back online after moving. Fortunately, no flying was involved with delayed flights, overflowing toilets or lost luggage. I have backlogged articles to post.

This Daily News editorial is one definitely worth reading. The D-N hits the nail on the head that last week’s runway incursion is being used as another excuse to expand Los Angeles International Airport (LAX).
http://www.dailynews.com/opinions/ci_6659781

While LAX needs to be safe and secure, it does not need to be expanded. The whole idea behind regionalism is to allow people to use their local airports for flights instead of clogging up the freeways to go to LAX. We need expansion at Ontario to provide Orange County and Inland Empire residents with an international gateway. We need expansion at Palmdale to give Antelope Valley, Santa Clarita Valley, Victor Valley, North San Fernando Valley and Ventura County residents an easily accessible airport. This is why groups such as the Alliance for a Regional Solution for Airport Congestion (ARSAC) http://www.regionalsolution.org/ were formed and the Southern California Regional Airport Authority (SCRAA) was revived. http://www.scraa.org/

LAX expansion supporters are not some much concerned about runway safety or passenger convenience as they are about getting multi-billion dollar construction contracts. This is why in October 2004 when the LAX Master Plan was up for a vote at the L.A. City Council that we had seen then-L.A. Area Chamber of Commerce Chairman George Kieffer standing arm-in-arm with then-L.A. County Federation Secretary-Treasurer Miguel Contreras. It was a disgusting sight of business arm-in-arm with labor ready to feed at the public trough. Had LAX Master Plan Alternative D been implemented, it would have been the largest public works project (by dollar value) in the United States. The original cost estimate of $9.6 billion ballooned to $11.3 billion by the time the LAX Master Plan reached the Los Angeles City Council by October 2004. Today, that cost is probably more than double due to the rising demand for concrete and steel in China. Considering these costs, the public’s money is better spent in creating additional regional airport capacity at Ontario and Palmdale than throwing money down the drain to remodel dirty restrooms at LAX. LAX restrooms should be cleaned daily as a course of regular business. It should not take a J.D. Power & Associates survey to tell LAX to clean up its restrooms.

Getting back to runway safety. There is no need to move the north runway further north or to install a centerline taxiway. A centerline taxiway will not resolve the two recurring safety problems at LAX: 1) aircraft entering runway areas without permission and 2) controllers allowing aircraft to land on the inboard runways which are supposed to be used for take-offs only.

Aircraft entering runways at LAX without permission is a solvable problem. Since 1998, there have been 16 runway incursions on the north runway complex. None of these incursions were fatal or caused damaged to aircraft or other property. Out of these 16, 10 have been problems where aircraft have crossed the hold bars to runway entrances, but not actually entered the runway. The solution to this problem is something called Runway Status Lights (RWSL). RWSL are red lights installed at all runway entrances. When the red lights are turned on, this indicates to the pilot that the runway is not safe to enter. Had RWSL been installed on the south runway complex during the recent Runway 25 Left rebuild, then two runway incursions on the remaining operational Runway 24 Right may have been prevented. In those two incursions, aircraft actually did enter or cross south inboard Runway 25 Right without permission.

RWSL is a proven technology having been tested and installed at Boston (BOS), Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW) and San Diego (SAN) airports. RWSL is a commercial-off-the-shelf technology with no less than three manufacturers offering this product. RWSL can be installed in about one year. This is a simple and cost-effective fix that can resolve LAX’s biggest incursion problem. To protect the flying public, the FAA and LAX should install RWSL immediately on all LAX runways.

The second biggest and the most deadly incursion problem at LAX is controllers allowing aircraft to land on the inboard runways. LAX has a Preferential Runway Use Policy of utilizing inboard runways for take-offs and outboard runways for landings. When controllers do not follow the Preferential Runway Use Policy, it can have fatal consequences. On February 1, 1991, a controller cleared a USAir Boeing 737 jet to land the north inboard Runway 24 Left after a controller had already given a SkyWest Metroliner turboprop clearance for a mid-field take-off on the same runway. Thirty-four people were killed when the USAir jet slammed into the SkyWest turboprop.
http://www.lafire.com/famous_fires/910201_B737Crash/020191_B737Crash.htm
This was the second deadly accident to occur at LAX. The other one was in 1978 when a Continental Airlines DC-10 suffered a tire blow out and left landing gear collapse. Two people died in that incident. Runway geometry was a not a factor in these incidents.

Since 1998, there have been 3 incidents where controllers gave permission to aircraft to land on the inboard runway where another aircraft had already been given permission to take-off. None of these incidents were fatal. One incident in 2004 almost had an Asiana Boeing 747-400 land on top of a Southwest Airlines Boeing 737. Fortunately, the Asiana pilot aborted the landing. The solution to this second most prevalent incursion problem is the easiest, fastest and cheapest to fix- controllers need to strictly adhere to the Preferential Runway Use Policy of using inboard runways for take-offs and outboard runways for landings. To protect the flying public, the FAA should make the Preferential Runway Use Policy their official policy for LAX tower operations today.

More on centerline taxiways later.