Re: airport contorl towers
For some reason, I've written another reply a number of times, but never placed them. This next comment will be based upon the, for lack of a better term, "big-airport" look at things that I have had to grow up with at O'Hare.
For most reasonably complex projects, our specifications, adjunct to the drawing set, consist of -3- "books". The last book is the "technical" portion of the specs. It is usually the thickest and addresses all of the 01000 to 16000 (plus) construction & materials specifications, plus whatever else the city wants to place i there. . This is true for each and every contracted construction project placed for bid. The funny thing is that these are only projects that the local municipality contracts for; not the federal governments work.
When the new O'Hare tower was built, not all that long ago, it was done as a "federal reservation" , (I believe). As such, it is my understanding that the local "Chicago" Electrical Code was superceded by NEC, plus whatever adjunct "other" codes were specified in the construction documents. I believe that the entire portion of this construction; that done by the federal government; was initially reviewed and then monitored while under construction, by the FAA or their representative. I believe that would also mean that Chicago electrical inspectors were not the called for this work. ( I'm trying to confirm this locally).
I was certified as an IAEI inspector and hold -3- of the certifications. That being said, nothing in those areas would begin to certify, or even bring me close, to understanding what is required or even look for with respect to the airfield lighting and control systems installed today. As these are quite specialized systems and equipment, the FAA or their designated "agents" do the inspections and certifications. They wouldn't want to jepordize any of the airfield lighting and control systems that are being installed. It equates to human life in a very definitive sense.
In closing, perhaps I've been polluted by the airport, but most of the spec books that come across my desk for review, [with no airside involvement at all], are about 2" thick; I guess I'm just used to it.
[ February 24, 2004, 08:59 AM: Message edited by: flightline ]