Hubbry Logo
Runway incursionRunway incursionMain
Open search
Runway incursion
Community hub
Runway incursion
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Runway incursion
Runway incursion
Runway incursion
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Visualization of the 2007 San Francisco International Airport runway incursion.

A runway incursion is an aviation incident involving improper positioning of vehicles or people on any airport runway or its protected area. When an incursion involves an active runway being used by arriving or departing aircraft, the potential for a collision hazard or instrument landing system (ILS) interference can exist. At present, various runway safety technologies and processes are commonly employed to reduce the risk and potential consequences of such an event.

Definition

[edit]

The internationally-accepted definition of a runway incursion is:[1]

Any occurrence at an aerodrome involving the incorrect presence of an aircraft, vehicle or person on the protected area of a surface designated for the landing and take off of aircraft.

— International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)., PANS-OPS Doc 4444, Ch.1

The FAA defines a runway incursion as any occurrence at an aerodrome involving the incorrect presence of an aircraft, vehicle, or person on the protected area of a surface designated for the landing and takeoff of aircraft.[2]

In the United States, the FAA classifies runway incursions into 3 types, with 5 levels of severity:[3]

Runway incursion type
Operational incident Action of an air traffic controller that results in less than required minimum separation between two or more aircraft, or between an aircraft and obstacles (vehicles, equipment, personnel) on runways or clearing an aircraft to takeoff or land on a closed runway.
Pilot deviation Action of a pilot that violates any Federal Aviation Regulation, example: a pilot crosses a runway without a clearance while en route to an airport gate.
Vehicle/pedestrian deviation Pedestrians or vehicles entering any portion of the airport movement areas (runways/taxiways) without authorization from air traffic control.
Runway incursion severity (descending order)
Accident An incursion that resulted in a collision.
Category A A serious incident in which a collision was narrowly avoided.
Category B An incident in which separation decreases and there is a significant potential for collision, which may result in a time critical corrective/evasive response to avoid a collision.
Category C An incident characterized by ample time and/or distance to avoid a collision.
Category D Incident that meets the definition of runway incursion such as incorrect presence of a single vehicle/person/aircraft on the protected area of a surface designated for the landing and takeoff of aircraft but with no immediate safety consequences.

Analysis

[edit]
Audio of the 1 April 1999, runway incursion at Chicago O'Hare International Airport

Formal study of runway incursions began in the 1980s, following several high-profile near misses and fatal collisions of airliners operating on airport surfaces. One of the earliest reports on the topic was published in 1986 by the American National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), titled Runway Incursions at Controlled Airports in the United States.[4] Citing examples like the Tenerife airport disaster and the 1972 Chicago–O'Hare runway collision, a special investigation was opened "to investigate selected runway incursions to determine their underlying causes and to recommend appropriate remedial actions."[4]: 1  After detailed examination of 26 incursion incidents occurring in 1985, investigators compiled a list of conclusions and safety recommendations. Among their findings were a need for clearer airport signage, improved controller supervision, and revised training procedures for aircrews and controllers. Despite the valuable data generated by the investigation, the NTSB conceded that, at the time, "the magnitude of the runway incursion problem could not be measured because of both incomplete reporting and follow-up investigations by the FAA."[4]: 33 

Two years later in 1988, the Federal Aviation Administration issued its own report, Reducing Runway Incursions, with the purpose of establishing an integrated program for runway incursion reduction. Its general recommendations included:[5]: 44–45 

  • Establish a steering committee on runway incursion reduction
  • Accelerate development and field deployment of Airport Movement Area Safety System technology
  • Emphasize the analysis of pilot-related causal factors

In January 1991, the FAA published the first edition of its biennial Runway Incursion Plan (now known as the National Runway Safety Plan). The document introduced organizational and legislative reforms alongside new initiatives to leverage research on human factors, design, technological innovation, and professional development.[5]: 45–46  In August 1992, however, a US General Accounting Office (GAO) congressional testimony criticized the agency's budgeting, delayed implementation, and inadequate reporting of the initiatives, especially its rollout of ASDE-3 radar and Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) technologies.[6]

Despite newfound emphasis on runway incursion prevention, another fatal accident occurred on 3 December 1990, when eight people were killed after two Northwest Airlines flights collided in fog at Detroit Metropolitan Airport.[5] The NTSB determined the accident's probable cause to be pilot error due to communication errors, inadequate crew resource management (CRM), and disorientation exacerbated by deficient airfield geometry.[5]: 79  Additionally, the NTSB recommended stricter airport certification requirements under 14 CFR Part 139 in the areas of lighting and conspicuous markings/signage.[5]: 80 

In 2000, research into incursions at uncontrolled and non-towered airports was conducted by the Aviation Safety Reporting System based on data gathered by interviewing pilots who had experienced a runway incursion. Interviews lasted around 45 minutes to 1 hour, and the data was de-identified for FAA use in developing safety measures.[7]

In 2005, the FAA assisted ICAO in its creation of a formal, internationally-accepted definition of a runway incursion. The new verbiage was first added to the fourteenth edition of PANS-OPS Doc 4444, but it was not until 1 October 2007, that the FAA finally adopted the ICAO definition. Previously, the FAA had maintained that an incursion only included incidents in which a potential traffic conflict existed. An event without a potential conflict– such as an unauthorized aircraft crossing an empty runway– had been defined as a 'surface incident'.[8]

As of 2017, the last fatal runway incursion accident involving a U.S. Federal Aviation Regulations Part 121 air carrier was in 2006.[9]

Between 2011 and 2017, 12,857 runway incursions were reported in the United States. Between October 2016 and September 2017, 1,341 were reported. Of these, six were placed in the most serious categories A and B. Four of these were considered ATC incidents, and two were "pilot deviations". Of the 1,341 incidents, 66 percent were caused by pilot deviation, 17 percent were vehicle/pedestrian incidents, 16 percent were air traffic control (ATC) incidents, and 1 percent were "other".[9]

An FAA study of the year ending September 2016, found that of 361 runway incursions attributed to pilot deviation, 27 percent resulted from "pilot failed to hold short of runway as instructed", and 14.7 percent from "pilot failed to hold short of runway". 5 percent of pilot deviations were classified as the pilot failing to comply with an ATC clearance. In 3.4 percent of deviations, the pilot departed without a departure clearance.[9]

The NASA Aviation Safety Reporting Service (ASRS) received 11,168 reports of runway incursions between January 2012 to August 2017, at a rate of approximately 2000 per year. More than 40 percent of reports were filed by general aviation pilots, and 36 percent by air carrier pilots. Factors included situational awareness, communication breakdown, confusion, and distraction.[9]

Technology

[edit]

The Airport Surface Detection Equipment, Model X (ASDE-X) and the Airport Movement Area Safety System (AMASS) are computerized systems that are intended to alert air traffic controllers to the potential for a runway incursion.

The Honeywell Runway Awareness and Advisory System alerts pilots to the potential for a runway incursion.

List

[edit]

List of runway collision accidents with fatalities

[edit]
Date Accident Fatalities Injuries Aircraft/vehicles Airport Reports
2024-01-02 2024 Haneda Airport runway collision 5 18 Airbus A350-900 and De Havilland Canada Dash 8-Q300 Haneda Airport, Tokyo interim (in Japanese)
2022-11-18 LATAM Airlines Perú Flight 2213 3 40 Airbus A320neo and airport crash tender Jorge Chávez International Airport, Lima final (in Spanish)
2014-10-20 Unijet Flight 074P 4 1 Dassault Falcon 50 and snowplow Vnukovo International Airport, Moscow final (in English)

final (in Russian)

2001-10-08 2001 Linate Airport runway collision 118 4 McDonnell Douglas MD-87 and Cessna Citation CJ2 Linate Airport, Milan final
1996-11-19 United Express Flight 5925 14 0 Beechcraft 1900 and Beechcraft King Air Quincy Regional Airport, Quincy, Illinois final
1994-11-22 1994 St. Louis Airport collision 2 8 McDonnell Douglas MD-82 and Cessna 441 St. Louis Lambert International Airport, Bridgeton, Missouri
1991-02-01 1991 Los Angeles runway collision 35[a] 29 Boeing 737-300 and Fairchild Swearingen Metroliner Los Angeles International Airport, Los Angeles final
1990-12-03 1990 Wayne County Airport runway collision 8 10 McDonnell Douglas DC-9-14 and Boeing 727-200 Advanced Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport, Metro Detroit final
1984-10-11 Aeroflot Flight 3352 178 2 Tupolev Tu-154B-1 and maintenance vehicles Omsk Airport, Omsk
1983-12-20 Ozark Air Lines Flight 650 1 2 McDonnell Douglas DC-9-31 and snowplow Sioux Falls Regional Airport, Sioux Falls final
1983-12-07 1983 Madrid Airport runway collision 93 30 Boeing 727-200 and McDonnell Douglas DC-9-32 Madrid–Barajas Airport, Madrid final
1982-08-14 1982 Sukhumi Dranda Airport runway collision 11 Unspecified Tupolev Tu-134A and Let L-410M Turbolet Sukhumi Babushara Airport, Sukhumi
1978-02-11 Pacific Western Airlines Flight 314 43 ≥5 Boeing 737-200 and snowplow[b] Cranbrook/Canadian Rockies International Airport, Cranbrook final
1977-03-27 Tenerife airport disaster 583 61 Boeing 747-100 and Boeing 747-200 Los Rodeos Airport, Tenerife final (in Spanish)
final (in English)
1974-04-18 Court Line Flight 95 1 1 BAC One-Eleven and Piper PA-23 Aztec London Luton Airport, Luton final
1972-12-20 1972 Chicago–O'Hare runway collision 10 17 McDonnell Douglas DC-9-31 and Convair CV-880 O'Hare International Airport, Chicago final
1936-06-24 Carlos Gardel death 17 6 Two Ford Trimotors Olaya Herrera Airport

Category A runway incursion incidents

[edit]

United States

[edit]
See also: List of US aircraft near-miss incidents since 2023

The following table lists Category A runway incursion incidents in the United States since 2001.[10] This table only includes incidents in which all involving planes were operating under FAR Part 121 and Part 129, and were investigated by both FAA and NTSB. Note that the Category rank of Air Canada Flight 759 incident in 2017 was "N/A" according to the FAA Runway Safety database, so it is not in the following table.[11]

Date Airport Flights Aircraft Closest proximity Refs
2023-02-04 Austin–Bergstrom International Airport, Austin, TX Southwest Airlines Flight 708 and FedEx Express Flight 1432 Boeing 737-700 and Boeing 767-300ERF 150 to 170 feet (46 to 52 meters) NTSB
docket
FAA
2017-02-15 San Francisco International Airport, San Francisco, CA Compass Airlines Flight 6081 and Virgin America Flight 920 ERJ 170-200 and Airbus A320-214 Vertical: about 125 feet (38m) NTSB
docket
FAA
2015-02-17 O'Hare International Airport, Chicago, IL American Eagle Flight 3084 and United Express Flight 3710 Embraer ERJ-145LR and Bombardier CL-600-2C10 Between center: about 94 feet (29m)
Between wingtips: 20 to 30 feet (6 to 9 meters)		 NTSB
docket
FAA
2011-08-08 O'Hare International Airport, Chicago, IL Chautauqua Airlines Flight 5021 and Trans States Airlines Flight 3367 Embraer ERJ-135 and Embraer ERJ-145 Vertical: within 125 feet (38m)
Horizontal: within 350 feet (107m)		 NTSB
docket
FAA
2007-07-11 Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood Airport, Fort Lauderdale, FL United Airlines Flight 1544 and Delta Air Lines Flight 1489 Airbus A320 and Boeing 757 Lateral: 230 feet (70m) NTSB
FAA
2007-05-26 San Francisco International Airport, San Francisco, CA Republic Airlines Flight 4912 and Skywest Airlines Flight 5741 Embraer 170 and Embraer 120 Tower's estimate: 300 feet
Skywest crew's estimate: 30 to 50 feet
RPA4912 crew's estimate: 150 feet		 NTSB
FAA
2006-03-21 O'Hare International Airport, Chicago, IL Lufthansa Flight 437 and Chautauqua Flight 7826 Airbus A319 and Embraer ERJ 145EP 100 feet (30m) NTSB
FAA
2005-06-09 General Edward Lawrence Logan International Airport, Boston, MA Aer Lingus Flight 132 and US Airways Flight 1170 Airbus A330-301 and Boeing 737-300 171 feet (52m) NTSB
docket
FAA

Other

[edit]
Date Airport Summary Reports
2024-07-27 Afonso Pena International Airport
São José dos Pinhais, Brazil		 A Total Linhas Aéreas Boeing 727-2M7 (registration: PR-TTO) was performing a cargo flight. While taking off from Runway 15, it crossed paths with a vehicle that had entered the runway. The vehicle was towing a lighting tower. The aircraft’s right wing passed at an approximate distance of six meters from the lighting tower. final (in Portuguese)
final (in English)

See also

[edit]

Footnotes

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Runway incursion

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A runway incursion is any occurrence at an involving the incorrect presence of an , vehicle, or person on the protected area of a surface designated for the landing and takeoff of . These events represent a critical hazard, as they can result in collisions between , or between and ground vehicles or personnel, potentially causing catastrophic accidents. The (FAA) classifies runway incursions into four severity categories: Category A incidents, where a collision is narrowly avoided; Category B, involving significant collision potential requiring immediate action; Category C, where there is ample time and distance to avoid a collision; and Category D, the least severe, with no immediate safety consequences. Runway incursions arise from multiple causes, with pilot deviations accounting for approximately 60-65% of incidents, often due to miscommunication, lack of situational awareness, distraction, or failure to obtain clearance before entering a runway. Other contributing factors include operational errors by air traffic controllers, such as issuing ambiguous instructions, and vehicle or pedestrian deviations on the movement area without authorization. In fiscal year 2024, the FAA reported 1,758 runway incursions in the United States, with serious Category A and B events totaling nine—representing 0.51% of total incidents but highlighting ongoing risks at high-traffic airports. Globally, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) reports that while runway incursion accidents remain rare, incidents occur at a high rate, contributing to nearly 40% of fatal accidents when combined with related high-risk categories like runway excursions. Prevention efforts focus on enhanced , improved communication protocols, and technological interventions, such as runway status lights, ground-based systems, and standardized for clearances. The FAA's Runway Incursion Mitigation Program identifies hotspots at airports with multiple prior events and implements targeted mitigations, contributing to a 73% reduction in the rate of serious incursions in the first ten months of 2024 compared to 2023. As of 2025, serious incursions remain low amid increasing air traffic. ICAO's Global Action Plan for the Prevention of Runway Incursions promotes international standards, including risk assessments and , to address rising risks. Despite these advancements, vigilance remains essential, as human factors continue to drive the majority of occurrences.

Fundamentals

Definition

A runway incursion is defined by both the (FAA) and the (ICAO) as any occurrence at an involving the incorrect presence of an , vehicle, or person on the protected area of a surface designated for the and take-off of . This definition emphasizes unauthorized intrusions that compromise the safety of active operations, regardless of intent or outcome. The scope of a incursion encompasses the physical surface and areas inside hold position markings on adjacent taxiways or ramps. It specifically excludes events outside these protected zones, such as excursions, which involve an aircraft veering off or overrunning the surface during takeoff or . Similarly, it is distinct from broader surface incidents, defined as unauthorized movements within the movement area that do not involve the protected area. The term "runway incursion" originated in the aftermath of investigations into major accidents, including the 1977 Tenerife disaster—the deadliest in history, resulting from a collision between two aircraft on the runway—to standardize global reporting and analysis of such safety events. This standardization facilitated improved international coordination on runway safety protocols.

Severity Categories

The (FAA) utilizes a four-tier severity to evaluate runway incursions, enabling consistent risk assessment and targeted investigations into these unauthorized or unapproved runway events. This , detailed in FAA Order 7050.1B, categorizes incursions from A (most severe) to D (least severe) based on factors such as aircraft proximity, relative speeds, visibility conditions, and the nature of corrective or evasive actions required to avert a collision. Category A represents the most serious incidents, where a collision is narrowly avoided with little to no opportunity for evasive action, often involving high-risk scenarios like simultaneous movements on intersecting runways. For instance, an may abort takeoff and swerve to miss an oncoming by mere feet, with proximity typically under 100 feet horizontally or vertically and significant maneuvers such as rejected takeoffs or abrupt turns being necessary. These events demand immediate and extreme interventions due to minimal separation and high speeds involved. Category B incidents carry a significant potential for collision, requiring time-critical evasive actions by pilots, air traffic controllers (ATC), or ground personnel to maintain . Criteria include reduced separation, such as less than 2,000 feet horizontally or 200 feet vertically, often exacerbated by moderate to high speeds or limited visibility; an example is an overflying another by 150 feet during a takeoff roll, necessitating urgent ATC instructions or pilot braking. Category C encompasses moderate-risk situations where ample time and distance allow for avoidance without immediate peril, typically featuring greater separation margins. Here, proximity exceeds 2,000 feet horizontally or 200 feet vertically, with lower relative speeds and better visibility enabling non-urgent corrections; a representative case involves a vehicle entering the while an approaching has sufficient runway length to stop safely. Category D denotes the least severe incursions, characterized by an unauthorized presence on the protected runway area but with no immediate danger to other traffic. These often involve a single entity, such as a or crossing a hold line without conflicting movements nearby, resulting in no required evasive actions and minimal risk due to isolated conditions.

Causes and Analysis

Human Factors

Human factors play a pivotal role in incursions, with errors by pilots, air traffic controllers (ATC), and ground personnel often stemming from cognitive, perceptual, and physiological limitations. Pilot deviations represent the predominant category, accounting for approximately 62% of all U.S. incursions in 2024, according to a U.S. Office of Inspector General report analyzing FAA data. These deviations typically involve pilots failing to comply with ATC clearances, such as incorrectly entering or crossing a without authorization, which violates . Common contributing factors include mishearing or misinterpreting instructions due to radio congestion or accents, from visual illusions on unfamiliar runways (e.g., approach effects), and impairing decision-making during long duty periods. Such errors frequently result in higher-severity Category A or B incursions, where collision avoidance maneuvers are required. Air traffic controller errors, classified as operational incidents, contribute to about 20% of incursions and arise from lapses in issuing precise directives or maintaining vigilance over surface movements. For instance, controllers may provide ambiguous instructions, such as unclear taxi routes at complex , leading to unintended runway entries by or vehicles. Failures to monitor displays or anticipate conflicts during high-traffic scenarios can also allow simultaneous clearances that compromise separation minima between on intersecting runways. These incidents underscore the demands of multitasking in tower environments, where brief attentional shifts can escalate risks. Ground vehicle and deviations, comprising roughly 18% of cases, often result from inadequate or breakdowns in communication protocols among non-pilot personnel. Drivers or workers may enter protected areas without confirming clearance, particularly at busy hubs where is overlooked or instructions are misrelayed via radio. Lack of recurrent exacerbates these issues, as personnel unfamiliar with layouts misjudge hold-short lines during routine operations. Underlying many human errors are psychological elements, including cognitive es and pressures that distort . Expectation , for example, leads pilots to assume a familiar clearance pattern and proceed onto a prematurely, a factor identified in numerous deviation analyses. Similarly, elevated during peak hours impairs both pilots' and controllers' ability to process complex instructions, increasing the likelihood of overlooked conflicts. These factors highlight the need for targeted interventions focused on behavioral patterns rather than isolated mistakes.

Systemic and Environmental Factors

Airport layout issues significantly contribute to runway incursions by creating confusion during ground operations, particularly at busy hubs with complex taxiway configurations and non-standard geometries. For instance, intricate networks of intersecting runways and taxiways can lead pilots and ground personnel to misidentify paths, increasing the risk of unauthorized entry onto active runways. The (FAA) identifies "hot spots"—specific locations with heightened collision or incursion potential, such as confusing runway-taxiway intersections—as key problem areas, with 171 such sites documented across U.S. airports as of August 2025. At Chicago O'Hare International Airport, a major hub handling approximately 776,000 annual operations in 2024, mitigation efforts included removing a hazardous taxiway configuration that had been linked to multiple incursions. Such targeted redesigns under the Runway Incursion Mitigation (RIM) program have reduced risks by up to 81% at affected locations. Environmental conditions exacerbate these layout challenges by impairing visibility and , thereby amplifying the potential for disorientation on the airfield. Low-visibility scenarios, such as , heavy , , or operations during nighttime hours, reduce the effectiveness of visual cues and surveillance technologies like the Airport Surface Detection Equipment (ASDE-X), leading to higher incursion rates. FAA reports indicate that poor weather conditions, including reduced visibility, contribute to a notable portion of surface incidents, with fiscal year 2024 data showing 1,758 total incursions amid varying environmental factors. The Surface Awareness Initiative (SAI), which leverages Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) for real-time visibility assessments, has been implemented to address these weather-related vulnerabilities at select airports. Systemic flaws within operations further enable incursions through deficiencies in and procedures that support safe movement. Inadequate , faded markings, or insufficient —often identified during FAA Part 139 inspections—can confuse users, particularly at high-traffic intersections where quick decision-making is essential. The Incursion Mitigation (RIM) program has targeted these issues by enhancing and at 93 non-standard geometry locations, achieving a 78% reduction in incursions as of 2023. Communication protocols, while effective in local Runway Safety Action Team (RSAT) meetings, suffer from limited across FAA divisions, hindering comprehensive risk mitigation. High traffic volumes at understaffed towers compound these problems, with staffing shortages leading to controller fatigue and extended work schedules, as observed in 2024 site visits; fiscal year 2024 saw a 12% increase in incursions from 2021 levels amid rising operations. The FAA's Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing (ASIAS) program provides critical insights into these systemic elements through integrated data analysis, revealing procedural gaps in surface movement guidance that allow incursions to occur. ASIAS employs tools like the Aviation Runway Risk Analysis (ARIA) and Barrier Analysis Review (BAR) to evaluate risks holistically, identifying weaknesses in guidance protocols at complex airports where geometry and traffic intersect with environmental stressors. For example, ASIAS data highlights how unclear taxiway instructions in low-visibility conditions can lead to deviations, underscoring the need for standardized procedures to close these gaps. Poor signage, in particular, can amplify pilot errors by providing ambiguous directional cues during stressful operations. Overall, these factors illustrate the interplay between infrastructure, environment, and operations in fostering a safer airfield environment.

Prevention and Mitigation

Procedural and Training Measures

Regulatory bodies such as the (FAA) and the (ICAO) have established key standards to minimize procedural errors leading to runway incursions. The FAA mandates that pilots read back all clearances involving holding short of runways, line-up and wait instructions, and runway crossings to confirm understanding and reduce miscommunication risks. Similarly, ICAO's Procedures for Air Navigation Services (Doc 4444) requires flight crews to read back safety-related parts of (ATC) clearances, including those for runway operations, to ensure accurate comprehension. The sterile cockpit rule, enforced by the FAA under 14 CFR §121.542 and §135.100, prohibits non-essential activities and conversations during critical phases of flight, including , to maintain focus on surface movements. ICAO endorses a comparable sterile flight deck policy in its Manual on the Prevention of Runway Incursions, restricting distractions during and other low-altitude operations below 10,000 feet. Additionally, both organizations promote Surface Movement Guidance and Control Systems (SMGCS) at towers, particularly in low-visibility conditions, to provide structured guidance for aircraft and vehicles on the movement area. ICAO's Circular 148 outlines requirements for SMGCS implementation to enhance and prevent incursions. The FAA's Runway Safety Program offers comprehensive training initiatives to address human factors in runway operations. This program includes self-guided simulator sessions for pilots, focusing on recognizing and navigating hot spots—high-risk areas prone to incursions—through interactive scenarios simulating ramp-to-runway taxiing and post-landing movements. These sessions emphasize correct ATC instruction interpretation and hot spot avoidance, integrated into the FAASTeam WINGS course lineup for flight instructors. ICAO's Global Runway Safety Action Plan similarly recommends CRM and Threat and Error Management training tailored to runway incursion prevention for all personnel. Airport-specific procedures further tailor these measures to local risks. At high-risk airports, the FAA issues Arrival Alert Notices (AANs), graphical depictions of approach paths highlighting misalignment hazards to prevent wrong-surface landings, now integrated into the Chart Supplement and approach charts for 44 such facilities. Standardized markings on diagrams use consistent symbology—circles or ellipses for permanent ground movement risks and diamonds for transient ones—implemented nationwide since May 2022 to improve pilot awareness. also conduct regular safety audits, with the FAA initiating comprehensive reviews of incursion risks at the 45 busiest U.S. facilities in 2024, including procedural gap assessments, followed by a 2025 oversight report evaluating mitigation progress. These procedural and training measures have demonstrated effectiveness in curbing pilot deviations. FAA reports indicate a notable decline in the rate of documented incursions from 2023 to 2024. The National Runway Safety Plan (2024-2026) credits ongoing enhancements with contributing to stabilized incursion rates despite increased air traffic, underscoring their role in long-term risk reduction.

Technological Solutions

The Surface Awareness Initiative (SAI) is an ADS-B-based system that enhances air traffic controllers' situational awareness by displaying real-time positions of aircraft and vehicles on airport surfaces directly on tower screens, helping to prevent operational errors such as runway incursions at airports lacking advanced radar surveillance. Launched in late 2023, SAI updates displays every second and was first operational at airports like Nashville International and Austin-Bergstrom by mid-2024, with FAA contracts awarded to providers including Saab, Indra, and uAvionix for deployment at over 50 U.S. airports by the end of 2025. The Runway Incursion Device (RID), introduced by the FAA in March 2025 as the final element of its Runway Safety Portfolio, serves as a memory aid for controllers by providing visual flashing lights, voice prompts, and alerts to indicate when a or is occupied by or vehicles, thereby reducing the risk of incursions due to oversight. Initial installations are planned at five airports including Austin for evaluation, with first operational deployments beginning in April 2025 at select facilities, and full rollout planned across 74 U.S. towers by the end of 2026 to address gaps in smaller facilities. Other established systems complement these efforts by providing surveillance and verification capabilities. The Status Lights (RWSL) system uses automated, embedded red lights in and pavements to visually alert pilots and operators of unsafe conditions, such as an occupied ahead, without relying on controller communication; it is deployed at 20 major U.S. airports as of 2025. In September 2025, the FAA issued a for a cost-effective Safety Lighting System to enable wider deployment at additional airports. The Airport Surface Detection Equipment, Model X (ASDE-X) integrates , multilateration, and ADS-B data to enable controllers to track all surface movements of aircraft and ground vehicles in real time, particularly at high-traffic hubs like O'Hare and International, where it has been operational since the early . Additionally, the Approach Verification (ARV) tool, integrated into the FAA's Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System () and rolled out nationwide starting in March 2024, delivers visual and audible alerts to controllers if an approaching aircraft is aligned with the wrong or surface, preventing landing errors. Emerging technologies are incorporating to further bolster real-time monitoring and guidance. AI-enhanced systems, such as Universal Avionics' Taxi Assist unveiled in 2025, use speech-to-text analysis of clearances to generate graphical taxi routes on electronic flight bags, helping pilots avoid incursions by providing clear visual paths and overlays, with potential integration into apps like . Universal taxi guidance systems build on this by offering airport-wide visual cues, such as illuminated paths, to mitigate issues like poor visibility; the FAA has supported prototypes and plans expansions tied to SAI deployments at 50 sites by late 2025.

History and Impact

Historical Development

Prior to the , runway incursions were rarely recognized as a distinct issue, with incidents often attributed to individual errors rather than systemic risks, as comprehensive categorization and reporting systems were not yet established. The first major push for awareness came following a series of 1972 incidents, including the December 20 Chicago-O'Hare runway collision between a DC-9 and a CV-880, which resulted in 10 fatalities and highlighted communication breakdowns in low-visibility conditions. This event prompted initial FAA efforts to review ground operations, though formalized programs remained limited. The 1977 Tenerife disaster marked a pivotal moment, as the collision between two Boeing 747s—one from and one from —on the runway at Los Rodeos Airport resulted in 583 fatalities, the deadliest aviation accident in history and a classic runway incursion driven by miscommunication and fog. This tragedy spurred global awareness and led the (ICAO) to develop standardized definitions and procedures for runway safety, emphasizing and clear phraseology to prevent similar occurrences. In the and , regulatory responses intensified with the FAA issuing its Runway Incursion Action Plan in 1991, followed by the National Blueprint for Runway Safety in 2000, which outlined initiatives for improved , , and to reduce incursions. The 2001 Linate Airport crash in , where an SAS MD-87 collided with a Citation on the amid dense fog, killing 118 people, further accelerated reforms, including enhanced EUROCONTROL-ICAO collaboration on surface movement guidance and control systems. From the to 2025, incursions saw a notable rise in reported near-misses, with U.S. totals exceeding 1,000 annually by 2023—reaching 1,756 in 2023—partly due to a post-pandemic surge in and staffing challenges. In response, the FAA issued a Safety Call to Action in March 2025, targeting general and business through enhanced , technology deployment, and risk mitigation to address the increased volume of operations.

Notable Incidents and Statistics

One of the most devastating runway incursions in aviation history occurred on March 27, 1977, at Los Rodeos Airport in , , where two 747s—one operated by and the other by —collided on the runway amid dense fog and miscommunication between pilots and . The aircraft was cleared for takeoff but initiated its roll while the Pan Am jet was still taxiing on the active runway, resulting in 583 fatalities, making it the deadliest aviation accident to date. On October 8, 2001, at Milan Linate Airport, , a MD-87 (Flight 686) collided with a CitationJet 525A during takeoff in heavy fog, exacerbated by poor airport signage, lack of ground radar, and unauthorized entry of the Cessna onto the active . The crash killed all 110 on the MD-87, all four on the Cessna, and four on the ground, totaling 118 deaths. On August 27, 2006, at in , —a Bombardier CRJ-100—attempted takeoff from the wrong, shorter (Runway 26 instead of 22), leading to a crash shortly after liftoff due to insufficient length for the aircraft's weight. The accident resulted in 49 fatalities among the 50 on board, with the first officer surviving. More recently, on January 2, 2024, at Tokyo's , a A350-900 (Flight 516) collided with a Bombardier Dash 8-300 on 34R during , after the Dash 8 entered the runway without clearance due to a misheard instruction from . While all 379 occupants of the A350 evacuated safely before the aircraft was engulfed in fire, five of the six crew members perished. Significant near-misses have also underscored the risks of runway incursions. On June 9, 2005, at Boston Logan International Airport, a 737-300 crossed an active runway just as an was accelerating for takeoff, coming within seconds of collision due to air traffic controller workload and communication errors; quick action by the A330 pilots averted disaster for the 381 people on board. In November 2023, at , , an armed individual breached security and drove a onto the and runway area while holding his child hostage, creating a security-related incursion that halted all operations for over 18 hours without aircraft involvement but highlighting vulnerabilities in perimeter access. In the United States, the reported 1,758 runway incursions in fiscal year 2024, with nine classified as the most severe Category A or B events—representing about 0.5% of total incidents but involving high collision risk. Globally, the (ICAO) has noted a rise in runway-related incidents, including incursions, following the post-COVID traffic rebound, with such events contributing to 40% of fatal accidents in high-risk categories in 2024 amid record flight volumes. These incidents have driven substantial enhancements, but their impacts extend to , with serious incursions often incurring costs exceeding $100 million per event due to damage, operational disruptions, investigations, and liability— as evidenced by FAA investments totaling over $100 million in 2023 alone for incursion prevention at high-risk airports.

References

  1. https://www.faa.gov/airports/runway_safety/resources/runway_incursions
  2. https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/runway-safety-fact-sheet
  3. https://www.faa.gov/closecalls
  4. https://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/default/files/library-items/FAA%2520Runway%2520Incursions%2520Final%2520Report_3.12.25.pdf
  5. https://avion50.com/icao-2024-safety-report/
  6. https://www.faa.gov/airports/engineering/incursions_excursions/rim
  7. https://www.eurocontrol.int/publication/global-action-plan-prevention-runway-incursions-gappri
  8. https://www.icao.int/sites/default/files/APAC/RASG/SafetyTools/15-Model-Advisory-Circular-Runway-Incursion-Prevention-and-Pilot-Training.pdf
  9. https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/7050.1A.pdf
  10. https://skybrary.aero/articles/runway-incursion
  11. https://www.faa.gov/airports/runway_safety/excursion
  12. https://www.icao.int/safety/RunwaySafety/Documents/GRSAP_Final_Edition02_2024-02-19.pdf
  13. https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/7050.1B_with_CHG_1_and_2.pdf
  14. https://www.faa.gov/pilots/safety/pilotsafetybrochures/media/spatiald_visillus.pdf
  15. https://airwaysmag.com/legacy-posts/runway-incursions-causes-mitigation
  16. https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/close-calls-and-new-york-times
  17. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925753525001389
  18. https://ifr-magazine.com/practicalities/conquering-biases/
  19. https://aeronav.faa.gov/afd/07AUG2025/all_hotspot.pdf
  20. https://www.chicago.gov/city/en/depts/doa/provdrs/dbata/news/2025/April/04142025.html
  21. https://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/default/files/library-items/FAA%20Runway%20Incursions%20Final%20Report_3.12.25.pdf
  22. https://www.faa.gov/airports/runway_safety/plans/national-runway-safety-plan.pdf
  23. https://www.asias.faa.gov/i/studies/ASIASWRONGRUNWAYREPORT.pdf
  24. https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atc_html/chap3_section_7.html
  25. https://skybrary.aero/articles/atc-clearance
  26. https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/publications/directline/dl4_sterile.htm
  27. https://skybrary.aero/articles/sterile-flight-deck
  28. https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_120-57B.pdf
  29. https://skybrary.aero/bookshelf/icao-circular-148-surface-movement-guidance-and-control-systems
  30. https://www.faa.gov/runway_safety_pilot_simulator
  31. https://www.icao.int/sites/default/files/left-menu-pdfs/GRSAP_Final_Edition02_2024-02-19.pdf
  32. https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/arrival-alert-notices-facts
  33. https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/hot-spot-standardized-symbology
  34. https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/faa-opens-audit-into-runway-incursion-risks-45-busiest-us-airports-2024-10-15/
  35. https://nbaa.org/news/business-aviation-insider/2025-03/bizav-safety-experts-share-tips-on-preventing-runway-incursions/
  36. https://www.faa.gov/surface-safety-portfolio
  37. https://nbaa.org/aircraft-operations/safety/safety-through-innovation/emerging-airport-technology-aims-to-reduce-runway-incursions/
  38. https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-install-new-runway-safety-technology
  39. https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-launches-final-initiative-runway-safety-portfolio
  40. https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/faa-runway-incursion-system/
  41. https://avitrader.com/2025/03/20/faa-expands-runway-safety-technology-across-74-control-towers/
  42. https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/faa-to-roll-out-runway-incursion-device-at-74-air-traffic-control-towers
  43. https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/rwsl
  44. https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-announces-request-information-new-runway-lighting-system-bolster-runway-safety
  45. https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/asde-x
  46. https://skybrary.aero/articles/airport-surface-detection-equipment-model-x-asde-x
  47. https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-rolls-out-new-technology-controllers-improve-surface-safety-nations-airports
  48. https://skybrary.aero/articles/approach-runway-verification-arv
  49. https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/aerospace/2025-03-19/universal-avionics-unveils-ai-powered-taxi-assist
  50. https://www.airporttech.tc.faa.gov/DesktopModules/EasyDNNNews/DocumentDownload.ashx?portalid=0&moduleid=3682&articleid=131&documentid=158
  51. https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/SR0601.pdf
  52. https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAR7315.pdf
  53. https://www.faa.gov/about/history/timeline
  54. https://skybrary.aero/accidents-and-incidents/md87-c525-milan-linate-2001
  55. https://unitingaviation.com/regions/eurnat/cooperation-on-runway-safety-improvement/
  56. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/airport-runway-incidents-risen-close-calls-decreased-20/story?id=97358077
  57. https://www.faa.gov/airports/runway_safety/statistics
  58. https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/general-aviation/2025-04-01/us-runway-incursions-drive-new-safety-push
  59. https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/SIR8601.pdf
  60. https://skybrary.aero/accidents-and-incidents/b742-b741-tenerife-canary-islands-spain-1977
  61. https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/323208
  62. https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAR0705.pdf
  63. https://jtsb.mlit.go.jp/eng-air_report/interim20241225-JA722A_JA13XJ.pdf
  64. https://skybrary.aero/accidents-and-incidents/a359-dh8c-tokyo-haneda-japan-2024
  65. https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/61662/pdf
  66. https://www.reuters.com/world/hamburg-airport-remains-closed-police-deal-with-hostage-situation-2023-11-05/
  67. https://www.icao.int/sites/default/files/sp-files/safety/Documents/ICAO_SR_2025.pdf
  68. https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-invests-over-100m-reduce-runway-incursions-airports
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.