Page 294 - Planning and Design of Airports

Geometric Design of the Airfield 255

operational surfaces controlled by the air traffic control tower. A clear
line of sight to all taxilane centerlines is desirable. Operational sur-
faces not having a clear unobstructed line of sight from the tower are
designated as uncontrolled or nonmovement areas. At airports with-
out a permanent air traffic control tower, the runways and taxiways
should be located and oriented so that a future tower may be sited in
accordance with the continuous visibility requirements. This require-
ment may be satisfied where adequate control of aircraft exists by
other means [6].
A typical air traffic control tower site requires between 1 and 4 acres
of land. The site must be large enough to accommodate current and
future building needs including employee parking. Tower sites must
afford maximum visibility to traffic patterns and clear, unobstructed
and direct lines of sight to the runway approaches, the landing area,
and all runway and taxiway surfaces. Most towers penetrate the FAR
Part 77 surfaces and, therefore, are obstructions to aviation and may be
a hazard to air navigation unless an FAA study determines otherwise.
The tower must not derogate the signal generated by any existing or
planned electronic navigational aid or air traffic control facility.

References
1. Advisory Circular Checklist, Advisory Circular AC00-2.6, Federal Aviation
Administration, Washington, D.C., October 15, 1992 annual.
2. Aerodromes, Annex 14 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, Vol. 1:
Aerodrome Design and Operations, International Civil Aviation Organization,
Montreal, Canada, July 1990.
3. Aerodrome Design Manual, Part 1: Runways, 2d ed., Doc 9157-AN/901,
International Civil Aviation Organization, Montreal, Canada, 1984.
4. Aerodrome Design Manual, Part 2: Taxiways, Aprons and Holding Bays, 2d ed.,
International Civil Aviation Organization, Montreal, Canada, 1983.
5. Airport Capacity and Delay, Advisory Circular AC 150/5060-5, Federal Aviation
Administration, Washington, D.C., 1983.
6. Airport Design, Advisory Circular AC 150/5300-13, Change 14 Federal Aviation
Administration, Washington, D.C., 2008.
7. A Mathematical Model for Locating Exit Taxiways, R. Horonjeff, et al., Institute of
Transportation and Traffic Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, Cal.,
1959.
8. “Calculation of Aircraft Wheel Paths and Taxiway Fillets,” J. W. L. van Aswegen,
Graduate Student Report, Institute of Transportation and Traffic Engineering,
University of California, Berkeley, Cal., July 1973.
9. “Characteristics of High Speed Runway Exit for Airport Design,” A. A.
Trani, A. G. Hobeika, B. J. Kim, H. Tomita, and D. Middleton, International
Air Transportation, Proceedings of the 22nd Conference on International Air
Transportation, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, N.Y., 1992.
10. Criteria for Approving Category I and Category II Landing Minima for FAR Part
121 Operators, Advisory Circular AC 120-29, Including Changes 1 through 3,
Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, D.C., 1974
11. “Determination of the Path Followed by the Undercarriage of a Taxiing Aircraft,”
Paper prepared by Department of Civil Aviation, Melbourne, Australia.
12. “Determination of Wheel Trajectories,” E. Hauer, Transportation Engineering
Journal, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 96, No. TE4, New York, N.Y.,
November 1970.