In this lesson we will discuss the basic concepts of flight operations on contaminated runways,

including: definitions, recommendations from the Take-off and Landing Performance Assessment
(TALPA) - Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC), and categories of contamination.

Aircraft manufacturers are held to certification standards when assessing and publishing
contaminated runway performance data. This, in some instances, introduces a second set of
definitions.

Aircraft operators provide crews with fleet-and company-specific contaminated runway guidance.
This guidance combines regulatory and manufacturer guidelines and may add a third level of
definitions.
Pilots should refer to the Aircraft Operating Manual (AOM) / Flight Crew Operations Manual (FCOM)
for specific limitations, policies and operational guidance.

After the crash of a Southwest Airlines 737 at Chicago Midway in 2005, the FAA reviewed its rules in
relation to the calculation of landing performance and Runway Surface Condition Reports (RSC).
The result was the establishment of the Take-off and Landing Performance Assessment (TALPA) -
Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC).
TALPA - ARC determined that the standards in place for establishing landing distances were
inconsistent. Much of the data was based on test flights using new aircraft with test pilots to
determine the shortest possible landing distances on a dry runway.
The survey of operators of all types of aircraft determined that no consistency existed in the
application of safety margins, the use of thrust reverser credit and the consideration of pilot
technique and ability.
Recommendations from the TALPA - ARC included consistency in the assessment and reporting of
runway surface conditions. This led to the development and implementation of the Runway
Condition Assessment Matrix (RCAM).
The RCAM correlates runway contaminant types and depth to aircraft performance. The RCAM is
presented in a standardized format, based on airplane performance data supplied by airplane
manufacturers.
For take-off and landing performance a runway surface may be categorized as dry, wet or
contaminated.

A dry runway is one which is clear of contaminants and is not “wet”.

A runway is considered to be wet when the runway surface is covered with water or when there is
sufficient moisture on the runway surface to cause it to appear reflective, without significant areas of
standing water.
Note: the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), ICAO and some operators will consider a runway to
be wet if it is covered in any amount of moisture even if the surface is not reflective.
A runway is considered to be wet when the runway surface is covered with water or when there is
sufficient moisture on the runway surface to cause it to appear reflective, without significant areas of
standing water.
Note: the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), ICAO and some operators will consider a runway to
be wet if it is covered in any amount of moisture even if the surface is not reflective.
A runway is considered to be wet when the runway surface is covered with water or when there is
sufficient moisture on the runway surface to cause it to appear reflective, without significant areas of
standing water.
Note: the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), ICAO and some operators will consider a runway to
be wet if it is covered in any amount of moisture even if the surface is not reflective.
A runway is considered contaminated whenever standing water, ice, snow, slush or frost in any form,
heavy rubber or other contaminants are present over more than 25% of the runway surface area,
within the required length and width being used.

For a runway to be considered contaminated, the contaminant depth will exceed 3 mm (1/8 in).
Most manufacturers recommend that a take-off not be attempted when slush, wet snow, or standing
water depth is more than 13 mm (1/2 in) or when dry snow depth is more than 102 mm (4 in).
Runway surface design is an important aspect of contaminated runway operations.
The speed at which water drains from a runway surface is affected by the geometry and texture of
the runway. Porous or grooved runways result in less build-up of contaminants and provide better
friction values than regular surfaces.

Mismanaged operations on contaminated runways may result in a runway excursion.

The Engineered Materials Arrestor System (EMAS) is a technology designed to stop the runway
excursion of an aircraft while preventing human injury and minimizing aircraft damage.
This bed of lightweight, crushable concrete can be installed at the end of a runway, and an aircraft
will be slowed by the loss of energy required to crush the concrete blocks.
In Canada, a NOTAM pertaining to runway contamination is known as an RSC NOTAM. The
reporting methodology is compliant with the Global Reporting Format (GRF) for Runway Surfaces.
The decode for an RSC NOTAM is very similar to that of a FICON.
Shown here is an RSC NOTAM for Ottawa International Airport (CYOW). Select each portion of the
message to decode.
In addition to SNOWTAMs, some airports may elect to disseminate runway condition reports in the
remarks section of an ATIS message. This message will be in plain text.

Braking action reports issued by pilots are a subjective indicator of how effectively an aircraft can
stop after a rejected take-off or after landing. The standard terms for reporting braking action are:
good, good to medium, medium, medium to poor, poor, or less than poor.
As mentioned earlier, it is an EASA requirement that pilots notify air traffic services (ATS) by means
of a special air-report (AIREP) as soon as practicable whenever the runway braking action
encountered during the landing roll is not as good as that reported by the aerodrome operator in the
runway condition report (RCR).
Some Airbus aircraft incorporate a feature called Braking Action Computation Function (BACF). It
differentiates the part of deceleration coming from either aerodynamic, thrust reverse, or wheel-
braking. It compares the actual wheel braking performance to models of wheel-braking performance
under different “reference” runway conditions.
The runway state which most closely resembles the experienced deceleration is determined and
uses GPS data to identify the runway areas and several states at different points on the runway.
A few seconds after the aircraft speed has decreased below 30 kts, details about the runway state
become available to the pilot on a dedicated MCDU page. If the pilot feels that the runway was
slippery, or in a different condition to that communicated by Air Traffic Services (ATS), this
information can be accessed by the pilot and radioed to ATS at an appropriate moment.
In addition, the data calculated by BACF may also be sent automatically by ACARS message to
agencies appropriately equipped to receive the information.
In this lesson, we will discuss: the performance considerations associated with take-offs and
landings on contaminated runways, associated operational guidelines, and aircraft systems and
technology.

Policies, procedures and regulations vary amongst operators and from state to state. However,
certain fundamentals remain constant, including the fact that aircraft performance is significantly
altered when operating to and from contaminated runways.
Depending on contamination type and depth, accelerate-stop, accelerate-go and landing distances
will be affected, as will cross-wind directional controllability.
Take-off performance calculations will be in accordance with approved company procedures.
For operators using an Electronic Flight Bag (EFB), performance data will be obtained from the
software application developed, installed and approved for such use.
Other operators will require performance data to be obtained from performance tables in aircraft- or
company-specific manuals such as the AOM, FCOM and QRH or via company data-link.
Engine manufacturers recommend reduced thrust take-offs, where performance allows, to lower the
engine’s internal operating pressures and temperatures.
This results in reduced stress and wear on the engine, reduced costs on parts and maintenance,
increased engine life, and increased reliability, thus improving operating safety and efficiency.

There are two methods of reducing thrust on take-off: derated and Assumed Temperature (flex
thrust). The Assumed Temperature method may be used in conjunction with the derate.
The derate method programs the FMC to assume a lower rated thrust than maximum. In essence
the FMC is convinced it is operating a smaller engine.
The Assumed Temperature method programs a higher outside air temperature in the FMC than what
actually exists, limiting the engine’s maximum temperature.
Since derate assumes a programmed smaller engine the FMC is provided with a new set of certified
performance data. As a result of lower available thrust, lower Vmcg and Vr are included in the
performance data.
For this reason, the use of a fixed derate thrust reduction may be permissible from runways
contaminated by slush, snow, standing water or ice provided that performance planning accounts for
the RSC.
Use of the assumed temperature reduced thrust method, alone or in combination with fixed derates,
is not generally permitted on contaminated runways.
For aircraft performance, the limiting runway (field) length requirement is the longest of: accelerate-
go distance, All Engines Operating (AEO); accelerate-go distance, One Engine Inoperative (OEI);
accelerate-stop distance required.
Select a distance for more information.
Accelerate-go distance required, All Engines Operating (AEO) – 115% of the calculated distance
required to accelerate to V1, rotate at VR and climb to a 35 ft screen height at a speed of V2 + 10 to
25 KIAS.
Accelerate-go distance required, One Engine Inoperative (OEI) – the calculated distance required to
accelerate, suffer a failure of the critical engine, continue acceleration to VR, rotate, and climb to a
35 ft screen height at V2 (screen height reduced to 15 ft for wet and contaminated runways).
Accelerate-stop distance required – calculated distance required to accelerate, suffer a critical
engine failure one second prior to V1, initiate stopping and come to rest.
Since the runway length available cannot be altered, an operator will have the opportunity to either
reduce the operating weight of the aircraft to satisfy the runway length (field limiting scenario), or if
the runway is not limiting, to reduce the thrust to satisfy the engine manufacturer’s
recommendations.
In either case the operator will have to satisfy the most limiting of the following three scenarios;
accelerate go - all engines operating, accelerate stop distance, or accelerate go (One Engine
Inoperative).
Since the runway length available cannot be altered, the required thrust will increase and, if
necessary, the performance-limited weight of the aircraft will decrease in accordance with
performance capabilities to ensure that the most limiting field length requirement is satisfied.

When considering the accelerate-stop scenario in isolation, we can see that that a reduced weight
requires lower brake energy, less distance to stop and consequently allows for a higher V1.
Alternatively a higher weight will require more brake energy, more distance to stop and a lower V1.
When considering the accelerate-go (one engine inoperative) in isolation, a lower aircraft weight will
allow the aircraft to become airborne sooner and permit a lower V1, while a high aircraft weight will
require more speed to become airborne, use more runway and therefore will require a higher V1.
When the two scenarios are blended, the balanced field is evident.
When considering the accelerate-stop scenario in isolation, we can see that that a reduced weight
requires lower brake energy, less distance to stop and consequently allows for a higher V1.
Alternatively a higher weight will require more brake energy, more distance to stop and a lower V1.
When considering the accelerate-go (one engine inoperative) in isolation, a lower aircraft weight will
allow the aircraft to become airborne sooner and permit a lower V1, while a high aircraft weight will
require more speed to become airborne, use more runway and therefore will require a higher V1.
When the two scenarios are blended, the balanced field is evident.
Where open weight capacity exists, most performance solutions will render a range of V1 speeds.
V1 can never be less than Minimum Control Speed (VMCG). V1 cannot exceed Rotation Speed
(VR) or the Maximum Brake Energy Speed (Vmbe).

This range of V1 speeds can be employed to reduce V1 on contaminated runways, shortening the
distance to V1, which effectively increases the stopping distance available.
However, reducing V1 to accommodate the accelerate-stop case on a wet or contaminated runway
may spread the gap between V1 and VR, increasing the engine-out acceleration component, placing
a burden on the accelerate-go case.
Conversely, a higher V1 can be used to gain additional performance capability. The faster the V1,
the greater the performance capability with respect to the accelerate-go case.
However, a higher V1 places an increased burden on the accelerate-stop case.
Depending on the type, contaminants will have a two-fold effect on take-off performance. The drag
from some contaminants will diminish acceleration while all contaminant types reduce the aircraft’s
ability to stop.
The primary and most impactful of the two effects are that contaminates will reduce the coefficient of
friction, reducing braking effectiveness and therefore increasing the stop distance required.
However, where standing water and or slush are present, the acceleration portion of the accelerate-
go and accelerate-stop distance is also affected.
In this case the contaminant slows acceleration due to the effects of precipitation drag.
Shown here are the acceleration performances of various aircraft types on dry and slush covered
runways.

Precipitation drag is comprised of 2 components: impingement drag and displacement drag.

Impingement drag is the force created as the contaminant spray from the tires impacts parts of the
airframe – such as the flaps – aft of the main gear.
Displacement drag refers to the drag force that is created as the tires push the contaminant out of
the way when the aircraft is rolling down the runway.
The effect of precipitation drag is most evident in the accelerate-go, one engine inoperative,
performance.
Comparing our previous All Engine take-off figures in slush with One Engine Out, it is evident that
performance becomes severely degraded in these conditions.
Flight crews should consider abandoning the take-off if the aircraft is not accelerating as expected
and it has not reached V1. Abandoning the take-off after V1 should only be attempted if the
airworthiness of the aircraft is in question and with the expectation that the aircraft will not stop on
the runway surface.

Where practicable, a rolling take-off is preferred when operating from a contaminated runway. Such
a procedure will help minimise the ingestion of contaminants into the engines.

Precipitation drag can have a beneficial effect on aircraft performance in the case of a rejected take-
off scenario and during the landing rollout.
As the depth of contamination increases, the level of precipitation drag also increases, assisting in
the deceleration of the aircraft.
However, this drag benefit is minimal when considering the lack of braking effectiveness as
compared to a dry runway. Further, the effect of the drag will have been accounted for in the take-off
and landing performance figures and the V1 speed will be set accordingly.
Anti-skid devices are fitted to the braking systems of all modern transport aircraft.
Application of the brake system hydraulic pressure will be modulated before being transmitted to the
actuators in the brake units. This will ensure that optimum braking, based on wheel rotational speed,
is obtained.
In order to prevent tire damage resulting from a locked wheel, and to guard against the risk of
aquaplaning on a contaminated runway surface, a minimum wheel rotational speed must be
detected before any brake application will be achieved.
When a tire speed reaches a point where it can no longer displace water on the surface of the
runway, a thin film of fluid will remain and act as a lubricant causing a loss of traction. This will cause
a loss of braking effectiveness and possibly directional control. Once aquaplaning has commenced,
it can be sustained over surfaces and in water depths less than those required for its initiation.

The degree of aquaplaning will depend on numerous factors, including: the type and depth of
contaminant, tire condition and inflation pressure, aircraft ground speed, anti-skid operation, runway
crowning, drainage, surface grooving or roughness.

There are 3 types of aquaplaning that flight crews must consider: viscous, dynamic, and rubber
reversion.

Viscous aquaplaning occurs on all wet runways and is a technical term to describe the normal
lubrication action of the water between the tire and runway surface. While it does reduce the friction
it is not to such a low level that the wheel cannot be spun up after touchdown to initiate the Anti-Skid
System.
Viscous aquaplaning is more likely to be encountered in the relatively smooth surfaces of the runway
touchdown points where accumulations of rubber deposits may reside. It is the most commonly
encountered cause of low friction on wet runways and occurrences are often mistaken for dynamic
aquaplaning.
The minimum ground speed (in knots) for aquaplaning is determined by the formula: V = 8.6 x √P.
For example, if your tire pressure is 200 psi, the tire will aquaplane at speeds as low as 121 kt.
Enter a pressure value to calculate minimum ground speed for aquaplaning.

Rubber reversion is a virtually impossible event in a modern airliner that only occurs following
dynamic aquaplaning and only to aircraft without or with inoperative anti-skid systems.
Rubber reversion aquaplaning occurs when the heat of friction from a locked wheel in contact with
the runway surface causes the reversion of the rubber into its un-cured state, and boils the surface
moisture into steam.
The pressure of the steam will raise the centre of the tire off the runway surface while the tire edges
remain in contact, forming a seal, which traps the steam.
There will be clear evidence of rubber reversion on the tire as the un-cured rubber will appear to
have been splashed around the affected area. The runway will have a marked area where the tire
will have “steam cleaned” the runway where the tire had travelled.
Prior to landing on a contaminated runway crews should determine the landing distance available is
sufficient for the landing distance required as per regulatory requirements or company policy. Pilots
will be able to calculate their landing distances using printed tables or a computer provided by the
operator.

Aircraft certified landing distances are unfactored (not adjusted by any safety margin additives) and
are based on a dry, level, sea level runway at standard temperatures. Unfactored Landing Distances
are the baseline from which actual expected landing data are derived.
Actual Landing Distances (expected performance from a 50 ft screen height) are approximated by
multiplying unfactored distances by 1.67 for dry runways and by a further 1.15 for wet runways.
Additional factors that affect the landing distance are considered in performance charts and in flight
computers. These will include items such as the airport elevation, runway gradient, wind conditions,
MEL items or system malfunctions and runway condition.
Boeing has adopted TALPA - ARC recommendations in its newer fleets. The advisory normal-
configuration landing-distance data for the 747-8 and 787 includes the following: braking action and
runway surface descriptions, a 7 sec air (flare) distance, a 1.15 factor for operators that use FAA
requirements.
The advisory normal-configuration landing-distance data for other models, such as the 777 and the
Next-Generation 737 is also available under the same stipulations but only at the operator’s request.
For aircraft not equipped with built in electronic flights bags containing this information, calculations
can be made with aftermarket calculators installed on iPads or laptops. Calculations for performance
based landings can be done using the OPT (Boeing) or FlySmart (Airbus) on an Electronic Flight
Bag (EFB) or by company operations when these are not available.
Rapidly changing weather conditions may alter the runway conditions from the latest Runway
Surface Condition report issued by ATC. On approach, if there is any doubt as to the extent of
contaminant depth on the landing runway, an alternate runway or airport should be considered.
A stabilised approach will ensure the aircraft is in a position to land in the Touchdown Zone, allowing
for the maximum available landing distance. Autobrakes should be used in accordance with
company policy.
Touchdown of the main gear should be positive in order to break through the contaminant, achieve
effective contact with the runway surface, and ensure proper tire spin up.
Reverse thrust is most efficient at higher speeds and should be used as soon as possible.
The extension of the ground spoilers should be confirmed or selected, and there should be minimal
delay when lowering the nose wheel in order to increase the weight-on-wheels and minimise lift.
Use of tiller nose wheel steering should be avoided until the aircraft has slowed to a safe taxi-speed.

There are runway surface conditions, such as ice, that are beyond the coverage of wet and
contaminated performance data. On an ice-covered runway, even the most effective braking
systems will be ineffective with the presence of a braking coefficient near zero.
Nose wheel steering will also be ineffective, and the flight crew may not be able to correct for side
forces on the aircraft (due to crosswinds) once the aircraft decelerates. Flight crews should avoid
these conditions.
However, if a landing has been made, reverse thrust has been deployed and directional control is
subsequently lost, an attempt to regain directional control can be made by releasing the brakes and
deselect reverse thrust. Deselecting reverse thrust cancels the side force component. When the
centreline has been recaptured, toe brakes and reverse thrust can be re-applied.