曝光臺(tái) 注意防騙 網(wǎng)曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營(yíng)店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費(fèi)者

runway strip. The lack of 7.5 meters of “outer” shoulder does therefore make no difference between code E
and A380 operations.
3. Bearing strength
The inner shoulder must be capable of withstanding the occasional passage of the aircraft without incurring
structural damage to the aircraft. A380 alternate airport operations would result in a pavement loading below
or comparable to the most critical code E aircraft at Maximum Take-Off Mass (B777-300ER). If the shoulder
is for example designed for the critical B777-300ER at MTOM, it should cater for an A380 at alternate airport
weights.
Future A380 operators have indicated that a take-off weight limitation, based on MZFM + 3 hours fuel, is
acceptable for alternate airports.
The suitability of the runway and shoulder pavement for an A380 take-off is therefore a matter of comparing
it with the critical aircraft used for the design of the airport pavement.
The outer shoulder does not have to be designed for the occasional passage of an aircraft. Some states /
airports are studying the possibility of having the outer shoulder functions performed either by a stabilized
surface (which is a possibility also mentioned by the ICAO NLA circular) or even by a well tended grass
surface.
As stated in the AACG Common Agreement Document, the decision on the bearing suitability of the
shoulder (composition and thickness) is the responsibility of the airport or national authority. The authority is
able to declare a limiting takeoff weight for the A380, based on the gear layout, in the AIP or pavement
concession documentation
draft
6
Proposed alternative measures, operational procedures and operating restrictions for airports that
cannot comply with ICAO requirements or AACG recommendations related to shoulder width (in
combination with at least 45 meter wide runway).
 Runway and shoulder FOD inspection to a total width of 75 meters must take place before each A380
take-off if a 75 meters wide runway area is not already inspected on regular basis.
 Runway and shoulder FOD inspection to a total width of 75 meters must take place after each A380
take-off.
 Restrictions on actual take-off weight if the airport pavement PCN is not sufficient to handle an A380 at
MTOM; airlines will judge whether the published PCNs are appropriate for their outbound flights. MZFM
plus three hours fuel would appear to be a good measure for the majority of cases
[Comment: When possible it is advised to have runway and shoulder FOD inspection before and after each A380
landing]
Observations should be recorded in order to adapt this policy.
4. Runway edge lights
Runway edge lights are provided along both sides of the runway. They are located on the edge of the
runway or a maximum of three meters to the outside of the edge. In most cases elevated (and frangible)
constructions are used that could be subject to engine blast as the edge lights are almost in line with the
outboard engines of the A380.
Tests have been carried out to see if some elevated lights, currently available on the market, can withstand
blast profiles comparable with an A380 engine. These tests have shown that these light fittings should resist
the A380 blast.
The airport or local authority can perform runway edge light and signs inspection after each A380 departure
(which may well by required for FOD reasons). As the outer engines of an A380 are not fitted with thrust
reverse systems, it is not required to perform a runway edge light inspection after the landing of an A380.
Proposed operational procedures for airports with a 45 meters wide runway.
 Runway and runway shoulder as well as edge lights and signs inspection after each A380 departure.
3.2 Taxiways
Taxiway width
The ICAO Annex 14 Code F taxiway width is 25m, or 2m more than Code E. The A380 has a wheel track
0.3m larger than the Code E limit.
Extensive deviation studies, carried out at several airports around the world, have shown that the deviation
of large aircraft (code E) is much less than the 4.5 meters margin used in the formula to determine the
taxiway width. Results show that a deviation of less than 2.5 meters is a very realistic value under the
condition that proper guidance such as centre line lights and markings or equivalent guidance is provided for
night or low visibility operations.
Additional to the above, it can be stated that the outer main gear wheel span of the A380 is such that the
actual wheel to edge clearance (4.3m) is more than the 2.5 meters if the aircraft is taxiing on a code E
taxiway.
As found for destination airports, it can be concluded that on a 23 meter code E taxiway the A380 can taxi
safely under the condition that this taxiway is provided with proper guidance. Under these conditions no
　
中國(guó)航空網(wǎng) www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：航空資料5(92)