nautilusgr From Greece, joined Sep 2006, 68 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 13401 times:
[...] An Air New Zealand Boeing 747-400, flight NZ-1 from Los Angeles,CA (USA) to Auckland (New Zealand), rejected takeoff from Los Angeles' runway 25R at low speed when the crew suspected tyres on the left hand main gear deflated. The airplane slowed safely and vacated the runway via taxiway G onto B, the crew requested the left hand brakes being checked because of hot temperatures. Later passengers disembarked via mobile stairs and subsequently were bussed to the terminal.
Foreign objects were subsequently reported on the runway around intersection with taxiway F and on taxiway F between the runway and taxiway B. [...]
peteg913 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 85 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 5668 times:
Airport Operations constantly monitors the airfield for FOD at larger airports. Often times, however, this does not entail actually searching for FOD, but simply being aware of it. As someone else mentioned, the most effective way to eliminate FOD is from pilot reports. Even at smaller airports, during airfield inspections, done several times a shift, the movement areas are scrutinized for FOD.
Additionally, airports organize FOD walks frequently where whole runways are close while airport employees walk side by side removing every bit of FOD visible.