Wingman: Agrees with ALPA on Preferences to Procedure-Qualified Users

Captain Duane Worth, the president of ALPA (Air Line Pilots Association International) says the possibility that the FAA will restrict aircraft not qualified to use the agency's precision runway monitor (PRM) procedure is a good example of how incentives can be used to cause users to adopt new technology and procedures.  Wingman agrees. 

The recently published FAA advisory circular (AC90-98) calls for controllers, at airports where PRM is being used, to give landing clearance priority to pilots trained and certified to conduct PRM approaches.  Under the new guidelines, pilots not certified might need to divert to alternate airports if the visibility remains below the PRM –threshold value, or be forced to wait for a later departure clearance time from the FAA's Air Traffic Control System Command Center. 

PRM uses a high-speed, highly accurate radar monitoring system to enable controllers to safely monitor simultaneous closely spaced operations at airports where parallel runways are closer than 4,300 feet apart.  So far, the system has been installed at Philadelphia and Minneapolis, but will be followed by St. Louis, San Francisco, Atlanta, New York's JFK and Cleveland fairly soon.  To use the procedure, both the controller and pilots must have undergo special training, but no new aircraft equipment is required.    

The agency first published criteria for PRM operations and training in 1991, and Minneapolis was the first airport to use the system.  It soon became evident, however, that because of the large number of untrained pilots unable to accept PRM clearances, the airport witnessed the paradox of a lower arrival rate with PRM than without it.    

In recent congressional testimony, Woerth said the PRM experience at Minneapolis offers "a vivid example of why we need to rethink the outdated method of first come, first served."  While the first come, first served policy has been used to ensure equal access to facilities, Woerth said it needs to be changed when implementing new procedures that require airline investment in development and aircrew training.   

Worth argues that equipped and trained operators should realize the efficiency and cost savings warranted by their investment, and not be penalized by a small number of less capable operators.  He also maintains that, “As [other] new procedures become operational, the same philosophy and policy must be applied.  

Wingman believes not only is ALPA’s thinking on track regarding this issue, it might be a useful example for other who-goes-first airspace equipage problems.  04-23-2003.

Click here to become a registered Flt Tech Online subscriber and receive headlines delivered to your e-mail each week

Click here to go back to the headlines