Canadian Runway Friction Index

[Panama Jack]

Sorry, I know I could research this and probably find an answer but I have been extremely lazy during the last week and I was hoping somebody who knows could share their knowledge with me.

I was wondering how Canadian Runway Friction Indexes compare to other friction indexes around the World. Would a CRFI of 0.25 describe a surface which an RBI, JBI, or other "Mu meter" might assess as 0.25?

[bmc]

Which one are they using in Bahrain?

[pointyertoes]

I believe that there is a chart in the back of the CFS that attempts to correlate the various runway friction and braking report formats.
For example: "Poor Braking" is roughly equivalent to 21-29 Reported Mu and 0.25-0.40 CRFI.
As we all know this far from an exact science, so this is only the roughest of guides.

[pt6_driver]

Panama jack,


Lazy pilots end up DEAD pilots. Professional pilots don't ask silly questions like that. Do some research. It is because of people like you that some pilots get deemed stupid. If you want to be a professional, be one.

If your un-educated, go and get the required information.

[Panama Jack]

Oh-Kaaaaaay. . . pt6_driver doesn't know.

Thanks, pointyertoes, I will check that out.

@ bmc, we don't normally have to use that around here but I am wondering for elsewhere.

[Rockie]

If your un-educated

Classic.

[raven54]

Panama jack,


Lazy pilots end up DEAD pilots. Professional pilots don't ask silly questions like that. Do some research. It is because of people like you that some pilots get deemed stupid. If you want to be a professional, be one.

If your un-educated, go and get the required information.

You're a douche bag.

[Guido]

Panama jack,


Lazy pilots end up DEAD pilots. Professional pilots don't ask silly questions like that. Do some research. It is because of people like you that some pilots get deemed stupid. If you want to be a professional, be one.

If your un-educated, go and get the required information.

10 free Internets for you, pt6_driver! That was the best troll I've seen here in ages!

...


...


You were trolling... right?

[2R]

No such thing as a dumb question; only dumb answers.
QED

[W5]

Not much help, unfortunately:

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/s ... 4-1657.htm

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/innovation/tdc- ... rfi-95.htm

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/p ... htm#table4

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/innovation/tdc- ... 048-92.htm

[Vickers vanguard]

Panama jack,


Lazy pilots end up DEAD pilots. Professional pilots don't ask silly questions like that. Do some research. It is because of people like you that some pilots get deemed stupid. If you want to be a professional, be one.

If your un-educated, go and get the required information.

Maybe you could look into Panama jack's background and actual occupation before you post such an idiotic comment.............and keep pushing those PT6s by the way ......from an ex-GF guy.

[bmc]

Panama...maybe one day you'll be promoted upwards from CFM56's to PT6's. Maybe then you can wear a big watch and carry your Raybans on your belt loop.

Hey Vickers.....I was in there from 98-01. When were you?

You might have to explain to PT6 what a GF is.

[Panama Jack]

Don't be so hard on pt6_driver. I am sure he was just trying to be cute or chummy.

@ bmc, I already have the big watch but I prefer Seregetis over Ray Bans. The color of the glasses matches the color of my eyes after some flights.

@ Vickers vanguard, check your PM's.

@ W5, thanks for those links.

[Vickers vanguard]

Panama...maybe one day you'll be promoted upwards from CFM56's to PT6's. Maybe then you can wear a big watch and carry your Raybans on your belt loop.

Hey Vickers.....I was in there from 98-01. When were you?

You might have to explain to PT6 what a GF is.

Hi BMC,

Was there from 1993 to 2000. Engineering (line maintenance and MCC) in Abu Dhabi. Started on the L1011, and then did the A330 later on.......what a souvenir, when GF was flying to New York in their newly acquired 340. Unlike Emirates/Qatar, that airline had a rich history and most people were proud to be working there. I remember when Qatar was flying used 727...and emirates was zooming around with a pair of used A310.....Life was much more enjoyable back then, and the people ( .i.e Locals) were still naive.
Today, I work for an OEM in their training department.
cheers,

[bmc]

Vickers....one day I'll have to tell. You about the time they went to sell the A340's to an Asian airline that couldn't. Wait for their deliveries and were prepared to hold their noses and buy the five from GF. GF screwed the deal so bad, they walked. Stupid story, but not surprising.

I miss the Gulf. Our. Family has great memories of the place, the life style, the food and the desert BBQ's.

Ma asalamah habibi!

[DHC5]

Performing CRFI's is part of my job , a 0.2 reading is generally the guideline for closing "most" runways to aircraft operations until you can get it at or above 0.25..
A 0.4 - 0.5 is the ideal readings during periods of inclement weather (snow) and less than 2cm of accumulated precipitation on runway surfaces.
A 1.0 is IMPOSSIBLE to achieve.. it is basically going from 50km/h to 0km/h in a nanometer. if u cud achieve that, u'd be thrown through the windshield along with everything else in the cab and box of the truck!

[DHC5]

I believe that there is a chart in the back of the CFS that attempts to correlate the various runway friction and braking report formats.
For example: "Poor Braking" is roughly equivalent to 21-29 Reported Mu and 0.25-0.40 CRFI.
As we all know this far from an exact science, so this is only the roughest of guides.

We do not classify braking as poor, fair, or good.. that is up to the pilot to determine from the CRFI numbers provided and RSC's (Runway surface condition reports) provided to FSS.

[bmc]

DHC5...when I lived in the arctic, we'd regularly get a JBI reading on the snow/ice covered gravel strips. What would that value be expressed as today using other measuring scales?

[pointyertoes]

I believe that there is a chart in the back of the CFS that attempts to correlate the various runway friction and braking report formats.
For example: "Poor Braking" is roughly equivalent to 21-29 Reported Mu and 0.25-0.40 CRFI.
As we all know this far from an exact science, so this is only the roughest of guides.

We do not classify braking as poor, fair, or good.. that is up to the pilot to determine from the CRFI numbers provided and RSC's (Runway surface condition reports) provided to FSS.

We Canadians might not (although these terms are very common on tower freq in the winter), but the Americans do. In fact, `poor`, `fair`, or `good`are the only things they report outside of NOTAMS.

[Nark]

I believe that there is a chart in the back of the CFS that attempts to correlate the various runway friction and braking report formats.
For example: "Poor Braking" is roughly equivalent to 21-29 Reported Mu and 0.25-0.40 CRFI.
As we all know this far from an exact science, so this is only the roughest of guides.

We do not classify braking as poor, fair, or good.. that is up to the pilot to determine from the CRFI numbers provided and RSC's (Runway surface condition reports) provided to FSS.

We Canadians might not (although these terms are very common on tower freq in the winter), but the Americans do. In fact, `poor`, `fair`, or `good`are the only things they report outside of NOTAMS.

ahhhhh. False.

Runway friction reports are in the form of Mu. Which is reported on the ATIS.

Also, if there is a Pirep, they might be kind enough to pass it along. Such as, "Braking action reported as fair by 737, 3 minutes ago."
As far as conveying "poor, fair, good"

FAA AIM 4-3-9 states:

g. No correlation has been established between MU values and the descriptive terms "good," "fair," "poor," and "nil" used in braking action reports.

[. ._]

If your un-educated

Classic.

I thought so too.

[DHC5]

Arrivals or FSS may "elect" to inform inbound aircraft of braking conditions reported by other aircraft that have landed, it is not an obligatory procedure, but rather a courtesy.
The CRFI is strictly a number representing the "average" braking conditions over the entire runway surface length by performing several brake applications at a predetermined speed. These numbers are relayed via FSS/NavCanada channels and each carrier is responsible for assessing the number for their specific aircraft operational capability. The CRFI can change in minutes depending on ROP (rate of precipitation) and temperature on surface of runway or in the air... we report changes as often as required when significant changes occur or in the process of occuring. Its not fun when you guys ask us every 5 minutes "what is the CRFI now?" when it can take up to 7 minutes to cover 8000' of runway for a decent reading!