Statistics showing towered airports are "safer"?

Jay Honeck

Jay Honeck

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
11,571
Location
Ingleside, TX
Display Name
Display name:
Jay Honeck
Are there any such statistics?

I am in a discussion with a controller who claims that keeping the KOSH control tower open would make/keep the airport "safer". IMHO, at an airport like Oshkosh (AKA: "Sleepy" -- except for AirVenture week) there is no qualitative safety difference between towered and untowered.

Anyone got any "studies" that I can view/quote?
 
Jay Honeck said:
Are there any such statistics?

I am in a discussion with a controller who claims that keeping the KOSH control tower open would make/keep the airport "safer". IMHO, at an airport like Oshkosh (AKA: "Sleepy" -- except for AirVenture week) there is no qualitative safety difference between towered and untowered.

Anyone got any "studies" that I can view/quote?
Click to expand...

This gives some statistics, including the claim that most mid-airs occur at non-towered fields. I also remember hearing a statistical claim before but I'm having trouble locating an formal source for that.

http://flighttraining.aopa.org/pdfs/SA15_Collision_Avoidance.pdf
 
I would think that without some really inventive statistical magic that because of the difference between the traffic type in many towered environments versus non towered environments it would be a difficult statistic to have any degree of statistical significance. I think the sample size to look at a single airport that went nontowered to towered or visa versa would also be too small for statistical significance. That being said logically you would think a towered environment would be safer than a nontowered environment, but unfortunately logic and truth are often different things.
 
GauzeGuy said:
This gives some actual numbers: 78% of mid-airs in the traffic pattern occur at non-towered airports.

http://www.aopa.org/asf/epilot_acc/e_chi97fa218a.html
Click to expand...
The missing information here is what percentage of GA traffic occurs at non towered fields. If the number is 78% then you have one answer. If only 10% another answer. If 90% well a third answer. Oh and how do you accurately measure the traffic at nontowered airports?
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
But 99% of airports are untowered so 22% of accidents happen at 1% of towered airports therefore it sounds safer to fly into only untowered airports.
Click to expand...

A bit of a chicken/egg question, since most towered airports are also busier.

But a sleepy airport without a tower is probably going to have less traffic and be safer. The exception being if you have an emergency, in which case it would be preferable to go to a towered airport where they can roll the trucks and stop all other traffic.
 
Last edited:
Ted DuPuis said:
A bit of a chicken/egg question, since most towered airports are also busier.

But a sleepy airport without a tower is probably going to have less traffic and be safer. The exception being if you have an emergency, in which case it would be preferable to go to a towered airport where they can roll the trucks and stop all other traffic.
Click to expand...
I think it more like comparing apples and oranges in many respects as well. So many variable, many of which are difficult even to quantitate. For example, just estimating the amount of traffic at many nontowered airports is fraught with error. Different techniques are utilized, and some estimated can be off by 99%. So do not know if a true answer is even possible.
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
But 99% of airports are untowered so 22% of accidents happen at 1% of towered airports therefore it sounds safer to fly into only untowered airports.
Click to expand...

22% of mid-airs don't occur in the traffic pattern of a non-towered field. This doesn't mean they all occur at towered fields. :nono:
 
deeruck said:
22% of mid-airs don't occur in the traffic pattern of a non-towered field. This doesn't mean they all occur at towered fields. :nono:
Click to expand...

um, the original quote was: "78% of mid-airs in the traffic pattern occur at non-towered airports."

Aren't all traffic patterns either at towered airports or non-towered airports?
 
Jay Honeck said:
Are there any such statistics?

I am in a discussion with a controller who claims that keeping the KOSH control tower open would make/keep the airport "safer". IMHO, at an airport like Oshkosh (AKA: "Sleepy" -- except for AirVenture week) there is no qualitative safety difference between towered and untowered.

Anyone got any "studies" that I can view/quote?
Click to expand...

Such a study would require reliable data on traffic counts at nontowered fields, there isn't any. If KOSH was not the site of Airventure a control tower there could not be justified.
 
Bob Noel said:
um, the original quote was: "78% of mid-airs in the traffic pattern occur at non-towered airports."

Aren't all traffic patterns either at towered airports or non-towered airports?
Click to expand...

Since people at nontowered airports seem to really like straight in approaches, AND others fly B-52 patterns and wrong-altitude patterns, just what, precisely, does it mean to be "in the pattern" at a nontowered field?

If we all followed the AIM, it would be easy to say the downwind turn. But we don't.
 
MAKG1 said:
Since people at nontowered airports seem to really like straight in approaches, AND others fly B-52 patterns and wrong-altitude patterns, just what, precisely, does it mean to be "in the pattern" at a nontowered field?

If we all followed the AIM, it would be easy to say the downwind turn. But we don't.
Click to expand...

fwiw - I was include the following as being in the patten:

any aircraft on final, on departure, on base, crosswind...all more or less at or below pattern altitude.

But that's just what I would expect to be part of "in the pattern"
 
I would think, Jay, that there is not a bureaucrat anywhere who would create such a study - and - moreover - not a single politician, airport authority or other group who would ever think that they'd want such a fact. Because if it supports a tower then they could never get away without a 24/7 tower - and if it does not support the premise - then they'd get savaged for having one -
 
comanchepilot said:
I would think, Jay, that there is not a bureaucrat anywhere who would create such a study - and - moreover - not a single politician, airport authority or other group who would ever think that they'd want such a fact. Because if it supports a tower then they could never get away without a 24/7 tower - and if it does not support the premise - then they'd get savaged for having one -
Click to expand...

From the limited few Class D airports that I have flown into I'd say it is a safe cost cutting measure to deactivate all Class D airport towers.

Anyone know of a Class D that really has peak traffic to warrant a tower?
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
From the limited few Class D airports that I have flown into I'd say it is a safe cost cutting measure to deactivate all Class D airport towers.

Anyone know of a Class D that really has peak traffic to warrant a tower?
Click to expand...
KFRG on Long Island is a Class D that has the traffic to warrant a tower
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
From the limited few Class D airports that I have flown into I'd say it is a safe cost cutting measure to deactivate all Class D airport towers.
Click to expand...
That's because you're based in Kansas. :D

Tony_Scarpelli said:
Anyone know of a Class D that really has peak traffic to warrant a tower?
Click to expand...
I think there are numerous reliever airports around population centers which need a tower. One pretty far off the beaten track that would be hurting without a tower is KASE, Aspen, CO.
 
How about it depends?

A sleepy country airport would not likely be any safer with a tower, but I bet JFK during a push would be a disaster waiting to happen with out ATC.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
A bit of a chicken/egg question, since most towered airports are also busier.

But a sleepy airport without a tower is probably going to have less traffic and be safer. The exception being if you have an emergency, in which case it would be preferable to go to a towered airport where they can roll the trucks and stop all other traffic.
Click to expand...

unless you're the NORDO guy who ran out of gas that I spotted on extremely short final after I was cleared for T/O.
 
Skylane81E said:
How about it depends?

A sleepy country airport would not likely be any safer with a tower, but I bet JFK during a push would be a disaster waiting to happen with out ATC.
Click to expand...
Of course that is the correct answer, but like everything else, there is disagreement about what level of traffic warrants a tower. However, as people have pointed out, it doesn't seem like the airports on the list were necessarily chosen with that in mind.
 
No I think some were likely chosen because the need a tower in order to justify the budget.
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
From the limited few Class D airports that I have flown into I'd say it is a safe cost cutting measure to deactivate all Class D airport towers.

Anyone know of a Class D that really has peak traffic to warrant a tower?
Click to expand...

peachtree dekalb in georgia is busy.
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
From the limited few Class D airports that I have flown into I'd say it is a safe cost cutting measure to deactivate all Class D airport towers.

Anyone know of a Class D that really has peak traffic to warrant a tower?
Click to expand...

I keep saying over and over that KOSU will have crashes when the tower goes away. Yeah, sometimes its sleepy, admittedly. But when it's busy, it's busy, with a mix of commercial and trainers, jets and pistons, and everything in between. It is far busier than some class C's I've seen, most notably KTOL. And it had both crossed and parallel runways. If the tower goes away I will make no landings there for any reason.

And with the spreadsheet Dr. Mack put up, I can see that KOSU isn't even all that busy. Lots of detas with a lot more traffic.

Sorry to keep bringing it up, but then again there are about a half dozen threads on tower closures so far. My own airport is a class D and will not miss its tower at all. But the same observation cannot be made everywhere.
 
Last edited:
Jay Honeck said:
Are there any such statistics?

I am in a discussion with a controller who claims that keeping the KOSH control tower open would make/keep the airport "safer". IMHO, at an airport like Oshkosh (AKA: "Sleepy" -- except for AirVenture week) there is no qualitative safety difference between towered and untowered.

Anyone got any "studies" that I can view/quote?
Click to expand...
http://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/dot/files/FAA Federal Contract Tower Program Report^11-5-12.pdf
On page 3 you'll find the citations that you need.
 
Skylane81E said:
No I think some were likely chosen because the need a tower in order to justify the budget.
Click to expand...
Maybe you could expand on this statement because I'm not sure what you are trying to get at.
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
From the limited few Class D airports that I have flown into I'd say it is a safe cost cutting measure to deactivate all Class D airport towers.

Anyone know of a Class D that really has peak traffic to warrant a tower?
Click to expand...

CRG and MYF. Both very busy. Both also important considering the amount of IFR traffic in and out.
 
momalley said:
KFRG on Long Island is a Class D that has the traffic to warrant a tower
Click to expand...

I learned out of KAPA - Centennial airport in south Denver. It definitely needs a tower. It has an absolute ton of business jets and turbo props, helos, and most importantly a lot of flight training activity. That is all mixed into an environment with parallel runways and a crosswind runway. I can't imagine APA without a tower, at least during most of the day.

I actually fly out of KFLY in the Springs and there are many times when Colorado Springs airport is much less busy than KAPA and KCOS is a Class C.

Carl
 
Everskyward said:
Maybe you could expand on this statement because I'm not sure what you are trying to get at.
Click to expand...

What I am trying to say (without getting too political) is that in order to justify high budgets cuts are being made in visible and "painful" places.
 
Skylane81E said:
What I am trying to say (without getting too political) is that in order to justify high budgets cuts are being made in visible and "painful" places.
Click to expand...
I don't think any of the closures listed would seem too painful to the general public. :dunno:
 
Tony_Scarpelli said:
From the limited few Class D airports that I have flown into I'd say it is a safe cost cutting measure to deactivate all Class D airport towers.

Anyone know of a Class D that really has peak traffic to warrant a tower?
Click to expand...

KJAC...
 
Jay Honeck said:
All I see are comparisons between contract and FAA control towers.

These stats are VERY interesting, but not what I'm looking for...
Click to expand...

To get technical.... The tower has NO positive control of airborne aircraft. The towers main responsibility is to keep planes that are on the ground from hitting each other.... Granted... their "suggestion" of what to do is compelling though....:yes::D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top