Collision risk assessment between aircraft and obstacles in the areas surrounding airports.

Laura Moretti, Raducu Dinu, Paola Di Mascio

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Laura MorettiDepartment of Civil, Constructional and Environmental Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, Via Eudossiana 18, 00184, Rome, Italy.

Raducu DinuDepartment of Civil, Constructional and Environmental Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, Via Eudossiana 18, 00184, Rome, Italy.

Paola Di MascioDepartment of Civil, Constructional and Environmental Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, Via Eudossiana 18, 00184, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The topographical features of a site and the anthropogenic artefacts inside and outside the airport boundaries influence the infrastructure use. Objects penetrating the obstacle limitation surfaces (OLS) or standing outside those surfaces have to be mapped and risk-assessed because they could be a hazard to air navigation. This study aims to quantify the risk of collision between aircraft and obstacles in the airspace. There are no available procedures in the literature: the authors supposed that the obstacle type and the examined OLS affect the collision risk. The proposed risk values and amplification factors derive from interviews with technicians. The methodology has been implemented in an existing airport with 589 penetrating obstacles: the results highlight that 69.8% of obstacles imply a negligible risk, and 3.7% require further analyses by the competent aviation authority. In this study, buildings and pylons penetrating the Transitional Surface are the most hazardous obstacles.

Indexed as

Accident preventionAviation safetyObstacle limitation surfaceObstaclesRisk assessmentRisk of collision

Identifiers

PMID37539140

DOI10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18378

PMCPMC10395640

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY-NC-ND

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.