M12EDM Assignment Aerodrome Safety and Air Navigation


The student is invited to conduct a research of the current situation at this airport and provide two outcomes for each of the points above mentioned:


  1. Assessment of the current situation. There is information easily available about London City Airport.  The student should analyze the situation at the airport taking into account each of the points mentioned and the situation as a whole.
  2. Proposals for improvement: These proposals must be consistent with the analysis previously conducted.  The proposals must be compatible with the rest of initiatives proposed by the student.


For the purpose of this assessment and due to confidentiality, any indicative examples, figures, pictures and numbers could be used for filling in the template report. Nevertheless, you shall assume that there is no single correct answer to this coursework.  In reality, your report would be correct only if:


  1. Clearly identify benchmarks or measures that will indicate to you whether or not the solution is working.
  2. Generate a proposal for the future demonstrating its potential to deliver any improvement.


1.0 Introduction

Currently, the Aerodromes Safety and Air Navigation Services (ANS) are critical for the air transport industry globally.  Ideally, the aviation industry is a primary service for any country human and economic development (Fussey et al., 2016). In this regard, any threat, challenge or disruption in this industry could elicit massive implications to a country economy, political and regulatory contexts. Taking into account of the most developed Aviation industries globally, it is essential to note that the aspect of security is always prioritized with implications on time and the resources invested in the air transport sector. For the ANS to succeed, all the stakeholders must come together to offer inputs through close cooperation, in particular, the airport operators, airlines and the government authorities. Essentially, one of the critical aspects of the Airdrome Safety and ANS is the airport ramp which is the area where the aircrafts are parked, unloaded and loaded, refueled and boarded which are commonly identified as ground handling services. As a matter of fact, the ground handling services are essential for the efficient operations of the airports and airlines. The majority of the issues impacting on the safety of the contemporary airport’s operations is related to the apron area issues. In light of this study, the broad array of sources of the security issues in which the ground handling services can be included at the London City Airport (LCY) will be evaluated. In particular, a research of the contemporary situation at the airport will be provided and proposals for improvement relevant to political, social and economic factors involved.

1.1 Introduction of London City Airport (LCY)

London City Airport (LCY) has been operational since 1987 with its airport runaway being extended in 1992. It is comprised of fast, efficiently streamlined systems for handling both the passengers and cargos. Due to its location, it is an ideal city airport to use for any person travelling in Europe and beyond. This is equally necessitated by the impeccable ground handling services that enhance the smooth operations of the airport and its airlines (Blow, 2013). Nevertheless, the airport operations are characterized by a wide range of safety issues touching on the extent in which the ground handling services are disseminated.

2.0 Assessment of the Current Situation

LCY can be identified using several superlatives. According to Alderighi et al. (2011), LCY is the newest and smallest airport in the UK, closest in terms of its proximity to other parts of Europe and globally and built to target wealthy passangers.  The airport has the shortest terminal and hence cannot be used in servicing of bigger planes but only the smaller planes.

Figure 1: LCY Apron

Source: London City Airport (LCY) Location (2013)

In this regard, considering the figure 1 above, there is an extensive correlation between the potential foundations of safety issues impacting on the ground handling services. They include the fuel operations and other essential fluids, the aircraft demanded and unintended contacts, ground service equipment, stand conditions/operating environment, personal safety, and injury and aircraft de-icing and anti-icing.

2.1 Fuel Operations and Other Essential Fluids

Currently, the Ground Handling Operations Safety Team in the LCY have been tentatively working in the overall aviation industry for supporting a unified culture subtle for encouraging an open reporting of the accidents and incidents in the airport. The handling services and charges offered in the Airport are categorized as a single handling service (Alderighi et al., 2011). The services provided are inclusive of the arrival and subsequent departures at specifically agreed timings of the similar aircraft. Currently, the services furnished by the handling company are in accordance with the handling company standard fees and charges inclusive of Apron charges.  In regard to the fuel operations and other essential fluids, technically, it is only the eastbound leg of the airport that is transatlantic; on the westbound leg since the plane has no capacity of carrying enough fuel owing to its takeoff weight limitations as the runaway of the airport is very short. Currently, the plane is usually forced to stop and refuel at the Shannon Airport which is not convenient for the travellers and the cargos being transported.  In the airport premise, there exists an operations control center.  The operations control center is tasked with the collection and distribution of the information ranging from the flight times/plans and the nature of weather. The center is also tasked with inspecting the airport runaway,  taxiway, and the apron with the aim of ensuring that they are all time clear and serviceable. In the event of the emergency, the controllers ought to be the first to report and attend to the emergency. Nevertheless, there is no clear stipulation on how they would handle an emergency or a risk associated with fuel operations and other essential fluids.

In addition, if an airline is making a quick turnaround, there is an opportunity that is arranged for their fuel bowser to meet the aircraft upon its arrival at the Apron One. This is carried out for ensuring the existence of the speediest turnaround. The existing fuel farm of the company has been relocated to the site of the east part of the airport. It is at this point where the barge is supplied and linked to a hydrant oriented supply system hence eliminating the road tanker deliveries and the on-airport fuel bowsers transitions. Currently, there are no strategies set in place for ensuring that fueling and exchanges of other fluid services are coordinated, and in the event of any crisis report made substantially. For instance, the by-laws of the airport stipulate that no person should smoke or bring visible light in any place at a radius of 50 feet of any aircraft or the store of liquid fuel and explosives.  Despite this stipulation being eloquently stated, it is not clear on the actions that should be taken if such an occurrence happened in the Airport. A similar regulation in the airport affects the cars where no person can be allowed to use any vehicle in the airport unless its fuel and exhaust systems are at all times safe from any danger that is caused by fuel or the exhaust system. In summary, the airport reporting system of the accidents and incidents is not open but characterized by inefficient bureaucracies.

2.2 Aircraft Damage and Unintended Contact

In order to appreciate on the security issues relating to the aircraft damage and unintended contact, it is worth taking into account of the 2009 accident at LCY and the response of the airport Aerodrome safety services. The accident occurred on 13th February 2009 after the airline suffered a nose-gear collapse in the verge of landing at the airport. Luckily, none of the 67 passengers and 5 crew members suffered any subsequential injuries in the incident apart from 3 who suffered minor injuries. However, the aircraft was damaged beyond economic repair subsequently being written-off in May 2009. In this incidence, despite the security and emergency services offered by the Airport being prompt, there were no clear guidelines on how the communication would be done to all the affected stakeholders to avert them of the crisis (Gillen, 2011). it is evidently clear that the airport lacks a specific and just culture potentially encouraging an open reporting process of accidents occurrences and incidents. In the year 2015/2016, available figures from the UK Civil Aviation Authority have indicated that approximately 21 incidents were recorded at the LCY involving aircraft damage and unintended contact. For instance, one of the incidences that occurred at the airport this year October where a teargas canister was found at the airport by police after being discarded in a passenger pre-flight is a good indication of the proneness of the airport to aircraft damage. This equally exposed the aircrafts to unintended contacts with each other which ought to have contributed to the massive damage.

2.3 Ground Service Equipment

In the LCY operations, the ground services………………………………………………….Please click the paypal icon to receive this assessment report in full for only $20