1
$\begingroup$

Because runway overruns often end badly, and many runway ends (especially older ones) don’t have enough clear space available beyond the runway end for a full-size runway safety area (RSA), EMAS has come into wide use (at least in the U.S.) for quickly stopping overrunning aircraft within a smaller-than-normal RSA. An EMAS system consists of a bed of crushable pavement blocks (usually cellular concrete or foamed silica) which collapse when an aircraft runs over them, causing the aircraft’s landing gear to sink into the EMAS bed and drag through it, slowing the aircraft quickly to a stop.

However, EMAS is far from the only conceivable system for slowing and stopping overrunning aircraft:

  • One option would be a simple bed of sand or gravel (like the runaway truck ramps ubiquitous on steeply-inclined highways), which would slow an aircraft down through exerting drag on its landing gear; although not as effective as a full-blown EMAS, it would be capable of handling small aircraft that wouldn’t be heavy enough to crush the paving material of an EMAS, and would also be far less expensive, making it ideal for smaller general-aviation airports.1
  • In a similar vein to the sand/gravel arrestor bed, a thick bed of tall, stiff bristles would also slow aircraft fairly quickly through landing-gear drag (like how it takes a lot more effort to walk through waist-deep grass than on bare dirt).
  • Another possibility would be a large retractable net, similar to the nets aircraft carriers carry to stop aircraft if need be. Although aircraft-carrier nets are, admittedly, usually used for aircraft considerably smaller than your average airliner, the aircraft more than make up for this by landing at very high speeds compared to an airliner and by travelling a much shorter distance (and, thus, having much less time in which to slow the aircraft by braking) between touching down and hitting the net than an airliner at a land-based runway would, and the aircraft do have the ability to handle the considerably-larger aircraft that sometimes land on aircraft carriers; additionally, nets were formerly used at emergency landing sites for the space shuttle orbiters, which were about the size of a DC-9, but much heavier and having landing speeds over twice as fast, strongly suggesting that similar nets would be capable of handling even large airliners.

So why is the crushable-block EMAS the only system widely used for stopping overrunning aircraft?


1: One airport does have sand-filled arrestor beds at two of its four runway ends; however, this airport serves aircraft large enough that it should have a full EMAS instead, the sand beds being woefully inadequate for stopping aircraft of these sizes, as was spectacularly demonstrated in 2010. Sand/gravel beds are far better suited to stopping smaller general-aviation aircraft that aren’t heavy enough for an EMAS to be effective.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Technically St. Barts has a "sand arrestor" system... $\endgroup$ – Ron Beyer May 12 at 21:21
  • $\begingroup$ BTW you can see that an aircraft running into sand is not a gentle thing, the nose gear collapses and the fuselage digs in. Gravel would be the same thing. EMAS is nice in that it doesn't severely damage the aircraft or the engines. EMAS needs to be designed for the average aircraft/biggest threat factor because as you know, there's no "one thing for all aircraft" that works equally well. $\endgroup$ – Ron Beyer May 12 at 21:52
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ A Comair CRJ once ran into EMAS and the ldg gear supplier (Menasco or Dowty, forget which) made them remove the gears to be sent in for inspection, but they were undamaged, just EMAS-blasted. It took many many hours of polishing the EMAS-blasted inboard leading edges to restore the shiny surface finish. $\endgroup$ – John K May 13 at 1:28

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.