Latest News

Who visits FOD-detection.com?

FOD-detection.com serves a very niche market, when you combine this with the fact that it is the only independent website that serves this market, you end up with a site that attracts some very unique visitors i.e. potential FOD detection customers. I don’t share the website statistics with anyone, but today I thought I would share some very basic/general data on where our visitors are located.

The pie chart below shows the location of visitors for the last month. So, what can we tell from the data? for one thing the data is skewed by visits from the FOD detection system vendors themselves. This might seem odd, as there are only 4 vendors, but you have to remember that there are also less than 10 customers worldwide, so it’s not actually very surprising. Of the top 5 countries, US, UK, Israel, China and Singapore, all but one (China) are home to a FOD detection vendor. Read the rest of this entry »

March Air Reserve Base

Commercial airports very rarely seem to publicise any real data on FOD damage or FOD finds, the Military on the other hand are always keen to report the results of their FOD walks. An article in Aerotech News describes the efforts of the staff at the March Air Reserve Base (map).

During the quarter ending Dec 2010, FOD incidents caused over $21,000 in repair costs to our aircraft here at home station, not to mention, perhaps, some tense moments for our aircrews.

The article goes on to show an image of some damaged fan blades, and to thank those involved in their efforts towards improving air safety.

Your assistance last week is greatly appreciated and has made a difference.  The first photo is of one of the engines on our aircraft that had a recent encounter with foreign objects on takeoff last month.

They found 32 pounds of material during their FOD walk! Check out the article and see the images at aerotechnews.com.

Firm’s Runway Radar Looks to Improve Airport Safety

This article appeared on the San Diego Business Journal website yesterday. It’s a good piece that describes the FOD Finder system from Trex. It describes the current installs, the costs of the system and the amount of FOD found when the system was used at the Yuma Marine base (map). It also highlights the fact that the system can be leased on a monthly basis (this is an advantage over fixed systems where the cost of installation would make any short term leasing impractical), which is a great idea for those airports that are reluctant to purchase new technology.

The machine costs $400,000, he said, adding that airports can lease it for $12,000 to $15,000 per month. Bishop said airports often see a return on their investment in less than 60 days.

(source – The San Diego Business Journal)

How important is detection time?

I received an email recently (an anonymous email!) which questioned the effectiveness of those FOD detection systems which have a detection time greater than the mean time between aircraft movements. The question in the email was this, “Did you neglect the timing requirement [detection time] when you did your system design???[sic]“ The suggestion was that detection time should be the fundamental design consideration when building a FOD detection system. Personally I believe that reducing the risk from FOD should be the key design consideration. The idea that detection time is the key is based on the following argument:

If a system takes 6 minutes to detect an item of FOD, and the next aircraft is due in 4 minutes, then the FOD detection system is completely ineffective at reducing risk.

It’s the sort of argument that people in marketing dream of, not only does it appear to make a lot of sense, but FOD detection time is easy to quantify, and therefore it’s easy to compare across the various systems. Unfortunately, it does not stand up to any form of rigorous analysis. So, let’s take at look at this in more detail, the first thing we need to do is to define the risk from FOD.

Read the rest of this entry »

Catch up

Due to other commitments I’m a little behind with the FOD news from the last few weeks, so here’s a summary:

Edwards Air Force Base, they’re very serious about FOD

Oh, how I loathe checks for foreign object debris. FOD checks consist of everyone in each vehicle getting out with screwdrivers and removing every single rock stuck in the treads. (source)

Stratech’s iFerret Tackles Major Runway Hazards Faced By Airports Today

This story appeared on at least 3 news sites during the last few weeks. StockMarketsReview.com, SharesInv.com, and StockTradeReview.com. I’m not sure if we should read anything into the fact that the 3 websites are all related to the stock market.

Runway Debris Detection Systems Saves Lives

A QinetiQ article at Airport-International that discusses the Concorde incident. (source)

Justice, Safety Require Balance

An Editorial at Aviation Week that discusses the Concorde incident, and the issue with FOD, but makes no mention of the existence of FOD detection systems.

Significantly, there are no uniform standards for what is acceptable FOD or how to find the junk that could cause harm, just general agreement to try to eliminate all debris. This is accomplished chiefly through periodic inspections. (source)

FOD walks can be labour intensive!

I used to post images of FOD walks, but stopped as they were not particularly interesting, but this one caught my eye.

PACIFIC OCEAN (Jan. 3, 2011) – Sailors conduct a foreign object Damage (FOD) walk down after an abandon ship drill aboard the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70). Carl Vinson and Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 17 are on a deployment to the U.S. 7th Fleet area of responsibility. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class James R. Evans)

Source (Flickr)

Notice of Decision To Issue Buy American Waivers for Foreign Object Debris (FOD) Detection Equipment

From the Federal Register:

The FAA has determined that two manufacturers with products containing 60% or more U.S. content and U.S. final assembly are able to produce sufficient and reasonable amounts of FOD detection equipment meeting the requirements of FAA Advisory Circular 150/5220-24. Subsequently, the FAA will issue Buy American Waivers based on the 60% U.S. content and U.S. final assembly. The FAA will not issue any Buy American Waivers based on insufficient quantity to foreign manufacturers.

As a result the FAA will issue a Nationwide Buy American Waiver for the Trex Aviation Systems’ FOD Finder XF* and QinetiQ’s Tarsier FOD System based on the 60% U.S. content and U.S. final assembly waiver permitted in 49 U.S.C. 50101(b)(3). With the presence of these two manufacturers in the United States the FAA has determined there is sufficient quantity and consequently there is no justification for issuing any Buy American Waivers to foreign manufacturers based on insufficient quantity at this time.

This “Nationwide Waiver” will allow Trex Aviation Systems’ FOD Finder XF* and QinetiQ’s Tarsier FOD System to be used on AIP funded projects without having to receive separate waivers for each project. Having a nationwide waiver enables projects to start quickly without having to wait for the Buy American analysis to be completed for every project, while still assuring the funds used for airport projects under the statute are being directed to manufacturers that meet the Buy American requirements.

*The FOD Finder XF is Trex’s fixed solution, Trex is better known for their mobile solution, the FOD Finder XM.

Source (the federal register)(PDF version)

FOD Finder picks up Connect innovation award

Connect, a nonprofit San Diego organization that supports technology entrepreneurs, recognized eight companies for Most Innovative New Product of 2010. Among them was FOD Finder from Trex Aviation Systems. More details here.

Source article

Runway Safety: FOD, Birds, and the Case For Automated Runway Scanning

Iain McCreary (author of The Economic Cost of FOD) has published a new report entitled: Runway Safety: FOD, Birds, and the Case For Automated Runway Scanning.

The report has a dedicated website. Here’s the description:

The risks posed by Foreign Object Debris (FOD) and birds on the runway represent one of the largest economic and cost-reduction opportunities available to the aviation industry. Ironically, they are also among the least understood and least discussed risks. With combined costs in excess of US $35,000 per 10K aircraft movements, FOD and bird strikes on the runway cost airlines roughly $21 per flight, and as much as $0.12 (12?) per passenger.

This in-depth report is the best and most useful analysis of runway safety, FOD, and on-runway strikes available.

Data driven and values neutral, the report is useful to airlines seeking cost reduction measures; airports building an investment case for automated scanning; regulators setting safety policy; aerospace investors; consultants; technology vendors; and anyone interested in this emerging field.

Structured for easy reading, and quickly digestible with tools to support your own analyses, the report is quickly becoming ‘required reading’ in the aviation community. Whether you are a regulator, airport operator, airline, service provider, or technology vendors, this report has the answers to your questions about FOD, bird strikes, and automated runway scanning.

Nobody understands the case for FOD detection like Iain, so if you’re considering investing in a FOD detection system then I highly recommend taking a look.

Snow operations (good for some, bad for others)

Airport International have recently published an article describing how Tarsier can be used during snow operations.

Here are a couple of extracts:

snow banks will be present on the runway edges, potentially limiting a system’s line of sight

The elevated location of the sensors [Tarsier sensors] means they see clear over snow banks

The above is clearly a criticism of the FODetect system from Xsight, which has sensors located on the runway shoulders, adjacent to the runway lights.

It’s a valid criticism, but it’s not just snow banks that can cause a problem for FODetect. With the fragile sensors located alongside runway lights they are also prone to accidental damage from aircraft and ground vehicles. And of course when a sensor is damaged you don’t just lose detection coverage, you also have a potential FOD problem i.e. the damaged sensor itself will become FOD (FOD that you can no longer detect!). It’s the greatest risk associated with such a system, and given the lack of sales by Xsight it appears to be a risk the airports are not willing to take.

Latest Tweets

Filter by category

Browse the archives

amazon pop filter