曝光台 注意防骗
网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者
accommodation of NLAs at those airports that are unable to comply with annex 14, code F provisions. The
circular does not specify what is acceptable and what is not: the responsibility remains with the local
authority. The State should decide on the suitability of lower requirements than those given by Annex 14,
based on aeronautical studies. The principle is that safety requirements must be met, however efficiency of
operations should also be considered. Especially for airports, which have a very low number of A380
movements and therefore whose infrastructure is unlikely to be code F (or AACG)-compliant, efficiency
could be a minor issue.
The ICAO circular for New Larger Aeroplane Operations at Existing Aerodromes also gives guidance on
how to conduct aeronautical studies3. Several European Aviation authorities have, in close co-operation with
their airport organizations and industry, initiated a working group (A380 Airport Compatibility Group,
AACG),which performed several studies resulting in a number of recommendations for handling the A380 at
existing airports. The Common Agreement Document (version 2.1, December 2002) of this working group
contains all these recommendations.
Together with ICAO Annex 14 the AACG recommendations form a basis for the infrastructure requirements
at existing airports.
The ICAO Circular on OFZ for New Large Aeroplanes is now available and related comments are included
in this amended version.
For many airports, especially those airports that in the near future will only see the A380 in case of diversion,
even the AACG requirements may be hard to comply with. Deviations from these requirements are only
sanctioned when aeronautical studies are performed. Even conducting aeronautical studies at these airports
2 As defined in ICAO Circular 305
3 Additional material of relevance for the production of an aeronautical study is available on the ECAC website
(http://www.ecac-ceac.org/nla-forum/index.php), where several states and authorities have decided to make their
aeronautical studies available as a reference.
draft
3
can be an excessive burden in the context of the low number of A380 movements. A better solution in most
cases is to implement operational procedures to overcome the non-compliances. In chapter 3 of this
document, such possible operational procedures are given. The basic assumption for these procedures
is that the airport complies with the ICAO code E requirements.
Reference documents:
ICAO, Annex 14,
Volume I, Aerodrome design and operations, fourth edition, July 2004.
ICAO, Circular on New Larger Aeroplane Operations at Existing Aerodromes,
Cir 305 – AN/177, June 2004
Common Agreement Document of the A380 Airport Compatibility Group,
Version 2.1, December 2002
3. Alternative measures, operational procedures and operating
restrictions
In assessing the suitability of a given airport as an A380 alternate, two situations can be distinguished:
The case of a planned alternate, where the airport is regularly declared in the flight plans of an airline as
the alternate in the case of unavailability (most of the time for reduced capacity due to severe weather
conditions) of the destination airport. In this case, the conditions of accommodation can – and should –
be negotiated in advance by the airport with the airline and the ATC services. There may be some
restrictions to “normal” operations, but they should not be disruptive – if only because, in the case of
bad weather, the A380 is unlikely to be the only diverted aircraft and the alternate airport also has to
handle its own traffic.
The case of an unplanned diversion, most likely due to an aircraft emergency or technical problem. In
such a (rare) case, temporary disruption of operations at the alternate airport is to some extent tolerable.
The level of the operating restrictions that can be tolerated will be higher in the second case.
Therefore the aerodrome operator should properly assess the probabilities, in time and numbers, of being
used as an alternate for the A380, when defining the relevant provisions in order to guarantee adequate
safety and regularity of operations.
3.1 Runways
Runway width
Annex 14 prescribes a runway width of 60m for Code F aircraft. Many long-range traffic airports however,
and certainly those that will be filed as an alternate, have runways which are expected to comply with ICAO
Code E requirements, i.e. a width of 45m.
Subject to the A380 being certified on 45m wide runways, the AACG recommendations state that a 45 meter
wide runway can be used for Airbus A380 operations.
No specific alternative measures, operational procedures and operating restrictions are proposed
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：
航空资料5(90)
