NBGSkyGod From United States of America, joined May 2004, 603 posts, RR: 1 Reply 1, posted (2 years 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 4119 times:
Most airports do a FOD check pretty regularly during the day, usually its an airport ops vehicle driving along the movement areas looking for objects. When I was at BWI, AirTran had an airport FOD Walk of their ramp followed by a BBQ (lots of folks came for that), and when I was in the Navy once every 6 months we would have a FOD walk of all of the movement areas, were all of the base personnel would walk along the runways and taxiways (the airfield was closed for this).
"I use multi-billion dollar military satellite systems to find tupperware in the woods."
contrails15 From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1181 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (2 years 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 4117 times:
At JFK, Port Authority will go down a runway with the truck looking for FOD. For our ramps, its the ground crews responsibility to FOD there gate pre and post departure. We also have cleaning crews that do that rest of the ramp. We also used to have FOD Fridays where management and people from our HQ came out and did FOD walks around the ramp. Pretty much a joke in my opinion because we of was too cold, raining or snowing on that day you didn't see them out there so why bother.
26point2 From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 688 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (2 years 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 4093 times:
I recall walking into an airport ops office once to find an attention-getting FOD wall display of items found at that airport....wish I could remember where that was.
lke2fly From United States of America, joined May 2011, 67 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (2 years 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 4034 times:
I heard last night that there a big machine like a vacum cleaner that cleans the runways from FOD and rubber pellets left behind from jet wheels is this true?
unattendedbag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2242 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3995 times:
Quoting lke2fly (Thread starter): Does anyone know how often runways get cleaned at airports for FOD ?
A runway check is required at Part 139 airports once every 24 hours. This includes looking for lights that are out, FOD, pavement conditions and many other things. A runway isn't "cleaned" unless there is something to clean up.
airkas1 From Netherlands, joined Dec 2003, 3853 posts, RR: 57 Reply 6, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3831 times:
We do runway inspections anywhere from once a day to 5-6 times a day, it mostly depends on the traffic. Usually about 30 mins before the charters we go over the runways to make sure there is no FOD lieing around.
FOD on the apron is cleaned up as we spot it.
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 7, posted (2 years 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3816 times:
Quoting lke2fly (Reply 4): I heard last night that there a big machine like a vacum cleaner that cleans the runways from FOD and rubber pellets left behind from jet wheels is this true?
It's an overgrown streetsweeper...I saw one somewhere in Southern California (Ontario? San Bernardino? Sacramento?...something like that) two weeks ago.
jetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2462 posts, RR: 17 Reply 8, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3732 times:
Pardon me for being pedantic, but FOD stands for Foreign Object Damage, the damage done to an engine by ingesting foreign objects. Thus the runway is the wrong place to look for FOD. It is of course the right place to look for objects which might end up causing FOD.
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 9, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3720 times:
Quoting jetlagged (Reply 8): Pardon me for being pedantic, but FOD stands for Foreign Object Damage, the damage done to an engine by ingesting foreign objects. Thus the runway is the wrong place to look for FOD.
Although technically correct, the word "FOD" is used extensively throughout aviation to refer to the debris itself, rather than the damage. It's a case of an acronym going beyond its original definition. It is now more properly defined as "Foreign Object Debris."
OEM's, regulators, airlines, mechanics, engineers, and pilots routinely refer to the bits they find as "FOD", you'll see it in accident reports, part teardown reports, inspection boards, etc.
jetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2462 posts, RR: 17 Reply 10, posted (2 years 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3640 times:
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 9): Although technically correct, the word "FOD" is used extensively throughout aviation to refer to the debris itself, rather than the damage. It's a case of an acronym going beyond its original definition. It is now more properly defined as "Foreign Object Debris."
"Foreign Object Debris" is a tautology. Either "Foreign Object" OR "Debris" would be sufficient. I agree people loosely use FOD to mean the stuff that does the damage, but FOD has always meant, and still does mean, the damage itself.
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 9): OEM's, regulators, airlines, mechanics, engineers, and pilots routinely refer to the bits they find as "FOD", you'll see it in accident reports, part teardown reports, inspection boards, etc.
None of which makes it correct. It's actually very confusing to use the same acronym, in the same connection, for two different things.
Perhaps they should call the stuff that does the damage FID (Future Ingestion Debris)
[Edited 2011-05-25 08:36:08]
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 12, posted (2 years 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 3543 times:
Quoting jetlagged (Reply 10): I agree people loosely use FOD to mean the stuff that does the damage, but FOD has always meant, and still does mean, the damage itself.
Well, to be blunt, no. In modern aviation usage, FOD can mean either the debris itself and the damage caused thereby. You can tell quickly which definition is in use by the context.
I agree with you that, historically and grammatically, it should be just the damage but that's just not how the term is used today.
Quoting jetlagged (Reply 10): Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 9):
OEM's, regulators, airlines, mechanics, engineers, and pilots routinely refer to the bits they find as "FOD", you'll see it in accident reports, part teardown reports, inspection boards, etc.
None of which makes it correct.
True in a technical sense, but not really in terms of how English works. If everyone is using the word the same way, including all the technical people who actually use the word in its proper context and sense, using a common definition then eventually we have to concede that the definition has changed. When people say "Xerox" we know they don't literally mean "make a photocopy on a Xerox-brand photocopier" even though that's the technically correct historic definition.
PC12Fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2262 posts, RR: 5 Reply 14, posted (2 years 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3234 times:
In ramp and airfield classes that I teach, I like to refer to FOD as foreign object debris instead of foreign object damage. If foreign object debris is dealt with correctly, you won't have to worry about foreign object damage.
Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
JAGflyer From Canada, joined Aug 2004, 3328 posts, RR: 4 Reply 15, posted (2 years 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3232 times:
At YYZ, most of the gates have a FOD-box where people throw garbage and whatever else they find into. I have never really seen them emptied but they usually contain a few waterbottles or random stuff. In my last job I was driving airside daily and occasionally found FOD around the aircraft. Things like hardware (from aircraft mx), empty catering trash (bottles, etc), baggage labels, etc. I just picked up whatever I could see and threw it in the truck or whatever.
Supported the beer and soda can industry, recycle old airplanes!
Nice work. "The "Damage" term was prevalent in military circles, but has since been pre-empted by a definition of FOD that looks at the "debris". This shift was made "official" in the latest FAA Advisory Circulars FAA A/C 150/5220-24 'Airport Foreign Object Debris (FOD) Detection Equipment' (2009) and FAA A/C 150/5210-24 'Airport Foreign Object Debris (FOD) Management'."
I did cross check the AC's to make sure wikipedia was right, and it is. Can we admit now that it actually stands for "Foreign Object Debris"? Kind of like how ETOPS just stands for "Extended Range Operations"?
Skydrol From Canada, joined Oct 2003, 864 posts, RR: 11 Reply 18, posted (2 years 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3102 times:
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 17): Nice work. "The "Damage" term was prevalent in military circles, but has since been pre-empted by a definition of FOD that looks at the "debris". This shift was made "official" in the latest FAA Advisory Circulars FAA A/C 150/5220-24 'Airport Foreign Object Debris (FOD) Detection Equipment' (2009) and FAA A/C 150/5210-24 'Airport Foreign Object Debris (FOD) Management'."
I did cross check the AC's to make sure wikipedia was right, and it is. Can we admit now that it actually stands for "Foreign Object Debris"? Kind of like how ETOPS just stands for "Extended Range Operations"?
MD covered both definitions with their 'FOD Free' campaign as seen in this decal photo:
gc2 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2008, 53 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2845 times:
At STN we do a one way FOD check @40mph every hour, then 4 or more full inspections (20 mph, each side and all entry and exit points too) in a 24 hour period. Also if we have a local standby, bird strike, VVIP flight or full emergency there is always a Fod inspection.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined May 2011, 67 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Dec 2003, 3853 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2462 posts, 
From Japan, joined Jan 2000, 4304 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
