You are on page 1of 16

Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public

Policy
www.psocommons.org/rhcpp

Vol. 1: Iss. 2, Article 6 (2010)

Air Evacuation Operations


Stephen Robertson, IEM
Donald Griffith, IEM

Abstract
Federally supplied aircraft has been and can be an effective means of supplementing
surface transportation modes for moving people who need assistance in evacuation
prior to a disaster. It is easily integrated into a multi-modal mass evacuation
transportation system. Planning and execution of air evacuations in Louisiana and
Texas will be reviewed as well as future concepts for catastrophic disasters such as a
New Madrid earthquake. Key components and processes essential to successful
implantation of an air evacuation plan will be identified and discussed.

Keywords: evacuation transportation, air evacuation, planning 

Author Notes: This paper does not necessarily represent the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), any state or other government agency’s position or
stance. This paper is expressed solely as the opinion of IEM based on experience
over a variety of projects and disasters.

Recommended Citation:
Robertson, Stephen; Donald Griffith (2010) “Air Evacuation Operations,” Risk,
Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy: Vol. 1: Iss. 2, Article 6.
DOI: 10.2202/1944-4079.1024
Available at: http://www.psocommons.org/rhcpp/vol1/iss2/art6

© 2010 Policy Studies Organization


Published by Berkeley Electronic Press
- 175 -
Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, Vol. 1 [2010], Iss. 2, Art. 6

Introduction
Although the use of aircraft to move large numbers of people began to
flourish during the “Golden Age” of aviation—the years between World
War I and II—the use of aircraft to support mass evacuations prior to or
following a disaster did not assume significant proportions until 1944. Since
that time aircraft have been and continue to be an effective means of
supplementing surface transportation modes, with examples ranging from
small evacuations conducted by general aviation aircraft to large-scale
evacuations using commercial and military aircraft in an integrated multi-
modal system.
This paper will review current planning efforts and recent execution
of air evacuations in Louisiana and Texas as well as future concepts for
catastrophic disasters such as a Midwestern earthquake along the New
Madrid fault. The key components and processes essential to successful
implementation of an air evacuation plan will be highlighted.

Aviation Use in Evacuations


The use of aviation to support mass evacuations dramatically increases the
options available to emergency planners to move large numbers of evacuees
during a given time period than just using surface-based transportation
modes. Normally an enhancement to a surface-based evacuation plan, the
use of aviation may become the only transportation mode available when
surface transportation infrastructure is damaged or destroyed as might occur
with a catastrophic New Madrid Seismic Zone earthquake. Additionally, air
evacuations have proven an economical mode for evacuation. A recent air
evacuation was accomplished at a lower cost per evacuee than the
motorcoach and rail evacuations.
In addition to air evacuations for hurricanes being potentially more
cost efficient, they also add greater physical comfort to evacuees having to
travel to out-of-state shelters. The shorter flight times are more comfortable
than the longer motorcoach and train trips. This is especially true for the
elderly and small children. Additionally, the air evacuation is not affected by
contraflow or limited to predetermined destinations and evacuation routes. A
disadvantage to air evacuations is the logistical support required at the
airports.

http://www.psocommons.org/rhcpp/vol1/iss2/art6
DOI: 10.2202/1944-4079.1024
- 176 -
Robertson and Griffith: Air Evacuation

Execution of Air Evacuations since 2005


Hurricane Katrina—Louisiana 2005

Hurricane Katrina was one of the strongest storms to impact the United
States with sustained winds during landfall of 125 mph.1 Although not well
known, there was a post-landfall air evacuation of New Orleans area
residents. The Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport was
significantly damaged during Katrina, requiring 24 hours to open one
runway and 48 hours to open the second runway. The Federal Aviation
Administration worked with Air Force personnel to install temporary
runway, taxiway, and ramp lighting.2
The New Orleans airport worked closely with the local and state
authorities, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), the Transportation Security Administration,
the Department of Defense, and commercial air carriers to restore air
transportation needed to support the post-landfall evacuation of the New
Orleans area.
By working together, almost full air traffic control and navigational
aid capability was restored to the New Orleans airport in less than one week.
During that first week, an estimated 400 civilian and military flights safely
evacuated more than 24,000 Katrina victims.
Of the 24,000-plus Katrina victims that were air evacuated from the
New Orleans area, more than 13,000 were evacuated under Operation Air
Care.3 At least 15 commercial air carriers volunteered for the program,
operating more than 130 flights.4

                                                        
1
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Climate of 2005: Summary of
Hurricane Katrina, http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2005/katrina.html.  
2
Federal Aviation Administration, “FAA Response to Hurricane Katrina,” September
15, 2005, http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=6286.  
3
Operation Air Care was the largest airlift in U.S. history. The purpose of Operation Air
Care was to air evacuate Katrina victims out of New Orleans. Both commercial (U.S.
and foreign) and military aircraft were involved in the round-the-clock airlift from Louis
Armstrong New Orleans International Airport, bringing in supplies and taking people
out.
(http://www.disastercenter.com/Department%20of%20Transportation%20Hurricane%20
Katrina%20Efforts.html).  
4
Air Transport Association, “ATA Statement: Operation Air Care Evacuates 13,000+,”
September 13, 2005, http://www.airlines.org/news/releases/2005/statement_9-13-05.htm.  

© 2010 Policy Studies Organization


Published by Berkeley Electronic Press
- 177 -
Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, Vol. 1 [2010], Iss. 2, Art. 6

Hurricane Rita—Louisiana and Texas 2005

Hurricane Rita followed less than a month after Hurricane Katrina and
devastated large parts of the central Gulf Coast region. Like Katrina, Rita
also reached Category 5 strength in the Gulf of Mexico (the first time two
hurricanes achieved this rating in the Gulf of Mexico during the same
season).5 Before Hurricane Rita made landfall, the FEMA mission assigned
the Department of Defense to air evacuate an estimated 4,000 residents
(including medical patients). These FEMA-tasked evacuation flights flew
evacuees to other cities in Texas and Fort Smith, Arkansas, during a two-day
period.6 Rita’s air evacuation was conducted pre-landfall unlike the air
evacuation conducted for Katrina.
The federal, state, and local authorities were well prepared for
Hurricane Rita. The Department of Defense evacuated nearly 2,000 Texas
and Louisiana residents from the path of Hurricane Rita on September 22,
2005. The Department of Defense prepositioned aircraft, personnel, and
equipment to further assist with the relief effort.7
In a 24-hour period, Air National Guardsmen, Air Force reservists,
and active-duty Airmen conducted aeromedical evacuations of nearly 1,240
special needs individuals threatened by Hurricane Rita. Officials estimate
that more than 1.5 million people fled the Gulf region because of Hurricane
Rita.8

Hurricane Gustav—Louisiana 2008

For nearly three years, the southern coast of Louisiana was unthreatened by
a major storm (i.e., a Category 3 or higher hurricane). During those three
years, federal, state, and local authorities worked together to apply the
lessons learned about mass evacuations following the 2005 hurricane season.
Under the Post Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006,

                                                        
5
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Climate of 2005: Summary of
Hurricane Rita, September 22, 2005,
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2005/rita.html.  
6
Federal Aviation Administration, “FAA Response to Hurricane Rita,” September 25,
2005, http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=6290.  
7
United States Department of Defense, Air Force Evacuates Thousands; Crews, Aircraft
Standing By, September 24, 2005,
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=17224.  
8
Department of Defense, “Air Force Evacuates Thousands; Crews, Aircraft Standing
By,” September 24, 2005, http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=17224.  

http://www.psocommons.org/rhcpp/vol1/iss2/art6
DOI: 10.2202/1944-4079.1024
- 178 -
Robertson and Griffith: Air Evacuation

FEMA assumed statutory authority to provide technical assistance and


planning for mass evacuations. In 2007, FEMA worked with stakeholders to
create Federal Support Plans that included federally supported general
population evacuation of critical transportation needs or those New Orleans
area residents that lack a viable means to self-evacuate.
Hurricane Gustav made landfall in southwest Louisiana on the
morning of September 1, 2008.9 However, the state had already mandated an
evacuation of 12 at-risk parishes based on lessons learned from Hurricane
Katrina. In addition to nearly two million people evacuating the Gulf Coast,
President George W. Bush issued emergency declarations at the request of
the affected governors for Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas ahead
of the storm.10
The FEMA mission assigned the Department of Defense to provide
military and commercial charter aircraft to support the planned evacuation of
up to 20,000 New Orleans area residents. Once the air evacuation
commenced, the Transportation Security Administration processed more
than 32,500 passengers during a two-day period.11 These numbers included
ticketed tourists and conventioneers as well as critical transportation needs
evacuees. While the airlines evacuated their own ticketed passengers, FEMA
was prepared to evacuate any remaining ticketed passengers in the event the
airlines were unable to evacuate all of their passengers prior to the arrival of
tropical storm force winds.
While the air evacuation was successful, it was not without its own
lessons learned. Two problems that were noted were the coordination with
the host state airports and the re-entry plan to return critical transportation
needs evacuees to their homes following the storm.

Hurricane Ike—Texas 2008

Hurricane Ike quickly followed Hurricane Gustav in a similar fashion as Rita


followed Katrina in 2005. On September 9, Hurricane Ike emerged into the
southern Gulf of Mexico and made landfall at Galveston Island on
September 13 as a large Category 2 storm. The strong winds and storm surge
                                                        
9
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “State of the Climate: Hurricanes
& Tropical Storms August 2008,” August 2008,
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?report=tropical-
cyclones&year=2008&month=8&submitted=Get+Report.  
10
Department of Homeland Security, “Hurricane Gustav: What the Government is
Doing,” September 14, 2008, http://www.dhs.gov/files/gc_1221144856738.shtm.  
11
Ibid.  

© 2010 Policy Studies Organization


Published by Berkeley Electronic Press
- 179 -
Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, Vol. 1 [2010], Iss. 2, Art. 6

caused major damage to the high-rise buildings in the downtown Houston


area as well as some of the oil refineries in Texas City.12
The Air Force was prepared to support a possible air evacuation of
special-needs evacuees13 just as they had done for Louisiana. The Air Force
was ready to mobilize Airmen, equipment, and aircraft in full support of
hurricane evacuation operations as Hurricane Ike approached the Gulf
Coast.14
In preparation for Hurricane Ike, the Department of Defense was
planning, contracting, and alerting personnel to support any evacuation
requirements if mission assigned to do so by FEMA. Prior to Ike’s making
landfall, the military prepositioned personnel, equipment, and aircraft for
possible relocation of medical patients and special needs evacuees.15
While a federally supported air evacuation of special needs evacuees
was not necessary, military aircraft and personnel did support the evacuation
of hundreds of critical care and special needs patients from Corpus Christi,
Texas.16
Local Texas officials ordered the mandatory evacuation of Brazoria,
Galveston, Jefferson, Orange, and Chambers counties, as well as parts of
Harris and Matagorda counties. Voluntary evacuation orders were also
issued for Victoria, Hardin, and Jackson counties.17
Up to 7,500 guardsmen from Texas Military Forces assisted with air
evacuations of medical and non-medical special needs evacuees from the
University of Texas Medical Branch-Galveston using C-130 transport
aircraft.18

                                                        
12
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “State of the Climate: Hurricanes
& Tropical Storms September 2008,” September 2008,
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?report=tropical-
cyclones&year=2008&month=9&submitted=Get+Report.  
13
Special needs evacuees (SNE) are Texas-specific residents that lack the means to self-
evacuate. The federal government and Department of Defense call to SNEs in the
generic as general population.  
14
U.S. Air Force Website, “AMC Aircraft, Airmen Supporting Hurricane Ike
Evacuations,” September 11, 2008, http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123114798.  
15
Ibid.  
16
Ibid.  
17
Office of the Governor Rick Perry, “Gov. Perry Suspends Hotel Motel Tax for Victims
of Hurricane Ike,” September 12, 2008, http://governor.state.tx.us/news/press-
release/11131/  
18
Ibid.  

http://www.psocommons.org/rhcpp/vol1/iss2/art6
DOI: 10.2202/1944-4079.1024
- 180 -
Robertson and Griffith: Air Evacuation

Current Planning Efforts

There are a number of current efforts to prepare for aviation operations in


advance of specific and all-hazards disasters. The State of Arkansas and
FEMA Region VI are cooperatively working on a State Aviation Operations
Plan that will be robust enough to be effective for a catastrophic New
Madrid Seismic Zone earthquake, but written with an all-hazards approach.
Led by the Arkansas Department of Emergency Management and the
Arkansas Department of Aeronautics and supported by contractors from
IEM, this plan will combine the civil airports and aviation aspects of the old
Federal Aviation Administration’s State and Regional Disaster Airlift plan
(now FEMA State and Local Aviation Planning guidance) with the response
aspects of an air operations branch plan. Cooperation between FEMA
Region VI and the State of Arkansas in developing the Arkansas State
Aviation Operations Plan facilitates easy assimilation of the plan into the
Aviation Operations Plan for Region VI.
This is not a new concept in FEMA Region VI, having evolved from
a multi-year coordinated effort between FEMA Region VI and the State of
Louisiana to develop and execute the Federal Support Plan for air
evacuations out of the Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport.
This was part of a three-prong multi-modal plan involving motorcoach, rail,
and air evacuation of the New Orleans metropolitan area prior to a
catastrophic hurricane. This plan has been successfully executed during
Hurricane Gustav and refined with lessons learned, and serves as the basic
framework for pre-incident air evacuations.
The State of Texas has more than 600 miles of shoreline on the Gulf
of Mexico and five different geographic areas that might require air
evacuation support ahead of a catastrophic hurricane. From the Lower Rio
Grande Valley near the border with Mexico to the sixth largest metropolitan
area in the United States at Houston/Galveston, the State of Texas faces
some unique challenges in pre-hurricane evacuations. The Federal Support
Plan for air evacuation in Texas is the result of lessons learned and refined
by the Texas Department of Emergency Management, the Texas Military
Forces, and FEMA Region VI.
The concept of the Aviation Coordination Group is used by Texas.
The Aviation Coordination Group is the air coordination element at the state
level. The Aviation Coordination Group is staffed by decision-making level
personnel from all state and federal agencies that will operate aircraft in the
disaster area. The Aviation Coordination Group facilitates headquarters-to-
headquarters coordination in order to provide efficient planning and
execution of air support to requestors in the field. By having all the aviation

© 2010 Policy Studies Organization


Published by Berkeley Electronic Press
- 181 -
Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, Vol. 1 [2010], Iss. 2, Art. 6

players handling aviation requests and tasking in one room face-to-face, the
Aviation Coordination Group crosses functional lines to prevent
“stovepiping” or single-source “missioning.”
The Aviation Coordination Group does not command or control;
operational control and administrative control remain with the
owner/operator of the aircraft. Keeping within Incident Command System
principles, the size of an Aviation Coordination Group is dependent on the
size of the response. The Aviation Coordination Group only addresses air
issues and synchronizes agreeable solutions across local, state, federal,
military, and civilian air partners toward a common goal. As the Aviation
Coordination Group is a coordination entity, communication and
information flow to and from the Aviation Coordination Group is
paramount. Command and control decisions and mission assignments
remain with the State Emergency Operations Center and the agencies
controlling the aircraft. The Aviation Coordination Group serves to take
those mission requirements and assign them to the best aviation resource
available to accomplish the mission. This results in deconflicting multiple
aviation resources being assigned the same mission; sharing of the results of
missions across agencies; and deconflicting multiple aviation resources in
the impacted airspace. Requests for aviation resources will come through the
State Emergency Operations Center to the appropriate state agency or to the
Joint Field Office for federally supplied resources. The mission request and
assignment processes remain the same. The State Emergency Operations
Center will consult with the Aviation Coordination Group for a
recommendation on the most appropriate aviation resource to request and
whether or not the requested mission is already being accomplished by other
aviation resources. All aviation resources operating in the impacted airspace
coordinate activities through the Aviation Coordination Group. All agencies
providing significant aviation resources or conducting significant missions
should provide a liaison officer to the Aviation Coordination Group for
coordination.
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands present unique challenges in
population evacuation in the face of a hurricane (or earthquake) and the
movement of response personnel and supplies after an incident occurs.
Another unique challenge that aviation planning may address is the limited
housing available for response personnel. Those responders may be housed
on an island not impacted by an incident and shuttled by air to the impacted
island.

http://www.psocommons.org/rhcpp/vol1/iss2/art6
DOI: 10.2202/1944-4079.1024
- 182 -
Robertson and Griffith: Air Evacuation

Critical Operations Processes for a Successful Air


Evacuation
In the past, some air evacuations have been conducted (without detailed
prior planning) when needed. However, air evacuations will greatly benefit
from advance planning. Air evacuation planning requires close coordination
between emergency planners at local, state, and federal levels as well as their
transportation counterparts and the private sector owner/operators of airports
and aircraft.

Pre-Incident Evacuation of Ticketed Passengers

Pre-incident evacuations such as for hurricanes can start with planning to


surge commercial ticketed passengers. Often this can be accomplished by
the airlines simply using existing scheduled flights to full capacity.
Coordination between the airport operator, the air carriers, and
Transportation Security Administration and Federal Aviation Administration
officials is critical. In cities with large tourist and convention populations,
including those businesses in the planning process will make for smoother
operations and minimum future economic impact. All stakeholders should
have a clear understanding of their interdependencies and expectations for
operations. If the airport operator intends to declare the airport closed at
some point prior to the incident, that time frame needs to be clearly
communicated to all stakeholders.
The air carrier should balance the capacity of the existing flight
schedule with the cost of adding additional aircraft to the schedule, the
availability of gates and ground support services, and the ability of gate
agents and other employees to effectively handle an increased passenger
flow.
Transportation Security Administration officials should work closely
with both the airport operator and the air carriers to ensure the throughput of
screening checkpoints balances with the expected surge in ticketed
passengers. Federal Aviation Administration officials should communicate
any plans or policies to shut down air traffic control towers or other air
traffic control services.

Pre-Incident Evacuation of Non-Ticketed Passengers

Non-ticketed passengers are generally those who require government


(transportation) assistance with evacuation. There are a number of reasons

© 2010 Policy Studies Organization


Published by Berkeley Electronic Press
- 183 -
Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, Vol. 1 [2010], Iss. 2, Art. 6

why citizens require assistance with evacuation, including special medical


needs, disabilities, or simply having no viable means to self-evacuate.
Citizens requiring assistance should be evacuated using surface
transportation. When aviation is considered for evacuating non-ticketed
passengers, a number of critical issues must be planned and coordinated
across a broad range of stakeholders.
One of the most critical issues to be determined in any evacuation,
regardless of transportation mode, is when to start. The order to evacuate
will come from the chief elected official of a state or local jurisdiction and
may be voluntary or mandatory in nature, depending upon the laws of that
state/county. It is significant that all chief elected officials understand the
impact of the timing of their decision to act. In hurricane events, it is
common for elected officials to delay ordering an evacuation while waiting
to see what track an incoming storm will actually take. No one wants to
order an unnecessary evacuation; however, there is a finite amount of
capacity in aviation evacuation operations, and elected officials must have a
clear picture of exactly what delaying past the recommended start time
means in terms of people not moved out of harm’s way to guide their
decision making.
Air evacuations planning ideally will occur in advance of known
hazards, such as hurricanes. It should include all possible evacuation areas
and should be flexible enough to move with a hurricane track. For example,
the State of Texas has such a long coastline on the Gulf that there have been
a number of times where a hurricane track moved from Mexico to the Rio
Grande Valley area to Corpus Christi to the Houston-Galveston area and
then into Louisiana.

Integration with Surface Transportation

The movement of ticketed passengers to airports should be closely


coordinated with local transportation and law enforcement services to
manage the traffic flow. Tourists and conventioneers will likely move to the
airport via taxi, shuttle bus, and rental cars. An increased amount of traffic
from ticketed passengers should be anticipated and coordinated with
transportation and law enforcement services to avoid major traffic backups.
Transportation and shelter away from the airport should be planned for the
passengers who remain in the airport terminal at the time aircraft stop flying
as might be caused by weather issues.
Likewise, the movement of non-ticketed passengers to the airport
should be closely coordinated between the collection point and the airport
incident command post so that the arrival of aircraft and evacuees coincide.

http://www.psocommons.org/rhcpp/vol1/iss2/art6
DOI: 10.2202/1944-4079.1024
- 184 -
Robertson and Griffith: Air Evacuation

A clear plan of coordinated movement and communication should be


prepared and practiced.
In many cases, a combination of local and state government
agencies will have responsibility to collect and process non-ticketed
evacuees. A common model seen is for local jurisdictions to use transit
systems and/or school buses running routes to collect evacuees and transport
them to an evacuation hub. Public information messaging is critical prior to
the event so evacuees understand how to get assistance and what they should
bring with them, including any limitations on what not to bring. An
evacuation hub is usually a joint operation between local, state, and federal
agencies. Evacuees arriving at a hub will need to be assessed by local health
department officials to determine if it is safe for them to travel and by what
mode of transport. If they are to be moved by aircraft, then they should be
processed through security screening of themselves and their baggage and
manifested for a specific aircraft.
Security and passenger screening may be handled off-airport at the
evacuation hub or on-airport following surface movement to the airport from
the evacuation hub. Screening at the evacuation hub is usually facilitated by
the Transportation Security Administration who may set up temporary
screening lanes. The capacity of the security screening needs to be matched
to the expected flow of evacuees. It should be noted that in actual
evacuations of non-ticketed passengers, individuals may arrive at an
evacuation hub with a variety of baggage styles from standard luggage to
kitchen garbage bags. The site will need to be prepared to deal with non-
standard baggage situations and breaking garbage bags.

Manifesting Non-Ticketed Passengers

Federal Air Regulations Part 121.693 requires that each part 121
(Commercial Air Carrier) operator must have a load manifest that lists each
passenger and crew member by name unless they are maintained by some
other means. This includes all crew members, all revenue passengers, all
non-revenue passengers, children being held in the lap of an adult, and
persons occupying cabin or cockpit jumpseats. By contrast, Federal Air
Regulations Part 135.63 requires that each part 135 (Charter or On Demand)
operator only manifest the total number of passengers and the identification
of the required crew members.

© 2010 Policy Studies Organization


Published by Berkeley Electronic Press
- 185 -
Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, Vol. 1 [2010], Iss. 2, Art. 6

Air Traffic Flow Management

Air traffic flow management is the metering of air traffic in order to avoid
exceeding airport capacity in handling traffic and to ensure that available
capacity is used efficiently. Since only one commercial aircraft can land or
take off from a runway at a time, and those aircraft must also be separated by
time, every airport has a finite capacity; in other words, each airport can only
safely handle so many aircraft per hour. This capacity also depends on other
factors such as the number of runways available, the layout of taxiways, the
amount of ramp space available for parking, and the availability of ground
support services and material handling equipment. Air traffic control can
also be limiting as there are only so many aircraft an air traffic control tower
can safely handle.
In pre-incident evacuation planning, it is assumed that the airport
will be operating at its maximum capacity for normal ticketed passenger
service. This will most likely be achieved by filling all seats in existing
scheduled flights but can also be achieved by adding flights to the schedule.
Disruptions, such as equipment breakdown, weather, or lack of ground
support services, will cause delays in service.

Weather and Safety

Safety is the paramount concern in all aviation operations, and few elements
affect operations as much as weather. Recent pre-incident air evacuations
have all been in advance of hurricanes impacting coastal areas. Wind speed
and direction and thunderstorms influence aviation operations. Aircraft have
a not-to-exceed safety factor known as the crosswind component. Crosswind
is the wind blowing across the landing or departing runway, and each
aircraft has a published wind speed across the runway that it cannot exceed.
Post-incident evacuations may occur in situations other than
hurricanes and could involve any type of weather or incident (e.g.,
catastrophic earthquakes). While wind and thunderstorms will continue to be
primary safety considerations for aviation operations, additional factors such
as ceiling, visibility, functioning air traffic control services and aids to air
navigation will also have a great impact on whether or not operations are
even feasible.

Host State/Airport Coordination

Major operations to move evacuees by aircraft from a hazardous area require


a suitable place to take them. It is critical that the same level of coordination

http://www.psocommons.org/rhcpp/vol1/iss2/art6
DOI: 10.2202/1944-4079.1024
- 186 -
Robertson and Griffith: Air Evacuation

that goes into planning the departure end of an air evacuation go into the
arrival of those evacuees to a host airport and city. If evacuees are being
moved from one state to one or more host states, coordination needs to start
between those states. The host city’s human service agencies are a critical
part of the planning component to determine where evacuees may be housed
and fed, how they may be moved from the arrival airport to various housing
locations, how they may receive medical and pharmaceutical services, and
how they may be kept informed of what may happen in terms of return
movement. These will likely all be short-term operations, and if the disaster
causing the evacuation is such that a return movement is unlikely or may be
long delayed, immediate consideration for long-term housing and integration
into the host city must begin.
While the return movement of evacuees need not be at the emergent
pace of the evacuation, it requires no less detail in its planning. To start with,
a decision should be made as to the mode of return transportation. Socio-
political considerations may dictate that evacuees are returned in the same
manner as they were moved out; in other words, if they were evacuated by
air they would be returned by air.

Aeromedical Evacuations

Transportation of sick or injured persons may have originated during World


War I when wounded soldiers were transported from battlefronts to field
hospitals in open cockpit biplanes. Since that time, the transportation of
medical patients has developed into a significant operation, with modern
aircraft equipped with state-of-the-art medical equipment. A modern
aeromedical evacuation can move sizeable numbers of hospital patients from
city to city or from remote sites to urgent care facilities while providing en
route patient care.
Aeromedical evacuations are a highly specialized area of air
movement, so they will be covered here only in the most general terms.
Aeromedical evacuations will generally take one of two forms: pre-incident
evacuation of medical facilities or post-incident evacuation of casualties or
medical facilities that have become untenable. Like all major movement
operations, aeromedical evacuations require coordination between the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Defense, the
impacted state’s Departments of Health and Emergency Management, the
impacted hospitals or other medical facilities, the local emergency medical
services system, and emergency management on both the evacuation and
receiving ends of the movement. The known patient movement may include
hospital, nursing home, hospice, psychiatric care, and prison facility patients.

© 2010 Policy Studies Organization


Published by Berkeley Electronic Press
- 187 -
Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, Vol. 1 [2010], Iss. 2, Art. 6

The unknown patient movement may include casualties caused by the


incident as well as homecare or medically fragile patients.
As pre-incident aeromedical evacuations and general population
evacuations may use the same airport(s), coordination between these two
operations both on the field and with air flow management is an important
planning piece. The logistics of non-ambulatory patient evacuation by
aircraft is much more complex than that of general population evacuation
and will require different facilities at the airport. As with any mass
evacuation operation, the sooner the decision is made to move patients, the
number of patients that can be moved increases. Likewise, the return
movement of patients must be based upon the capabilities of the impacted
medical facilities to receive patients.

Post-Incident Mission Sets

A number of post-incident aviation missions and issues require the specific


expertise of aviation planners. The first should be damage assessment of the
impacted area and rapid needs assessment of airports concurrent with search
and rescue and aeromedical evacuations. There will likely be airlift requests
to move response personnel and life-sustaining commodities, and there may
be a requirement to evacuate a population from an impacted area. While
these missions should be familiar to emergency planners, the issues of an
airspace coordination plan, temporary flight restrictions, air flow
management, airfield assessments, and air traffic control are much less
familiar, and yet they are critical to the successful use of aviation assets in
any response mission.

Conclusion
Aviation has proven to be a valuable and extremely flexible component of
pre- and post-incident mass evacuations and aeromedical evacuations. To
successfully use aviation as a standalone asset or as part of an integrated
multi-modal transportation system requires specialized knowledge and
experience for those who plan and carry out evacuation operations. Our past
experience and current efforts in the area of aviation-supported operations
shows a strong need for a regional and national approach to air operations
for large-scale disasters.

http://www.psocommons.org/rhcpp/vol1/iss2/art6
DOI: 10.2202/1944-4079.1024
- 188 -
Robertson and Griffith: Air Evacuation

References
Air Transport Association. 2005. “ATA Statement: Operation Air Care
Evacuates 13,000+.” September 13.
http://www.airlines.org/news/releases/2005/statement_9-13-05.htm.
Barron, J., D. Cave, K. Fahim, and A. Nossiter. 2008. “Spared a Direct Hit,
New Orleans Exhales.” New York Times. September 2.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/us/02gustav.html.
Department of Defense. 2005. “Air Force Evacuates Thousands; Crews,
Aircraft Standing By.” September 24.
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=17224.
Department of Homeland Security. 2008. “FEMA’s Preparedness for the
Next Catastrophic Disaster.” March.
http://www.dhs.gov/xoig/assets/mgmtrpts/OIG_08-34_Mar08.pdf.
Department of Homeland Security. 2008. “Hurricane Gustav: What the
Government is Doing.” September 14.
http://www.dhs.gov/files/gc_1221144856738.shtm.
Federal Aviation Administration. 2005. “FAA Response to Hurricane
Katrina.” September 15.
http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=6286.
Federal Aviation Administration. 2005. “FAA Response to Hurricane Rita.”
September 25.
http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=6290.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2005. Climate of 2005:
Summary of Hurricane Katrina.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2005/katrina.html.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2005. Climate of 2005:
Summary of Hurricane Rita. September 22.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2005/rita.html.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2008. “State of the
Climate: Hurricanes & Tropical Storms August 2008.” August.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?report=tropical-cyclones&year=200
8&month=8&submitted=Get+Report.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2008. “State of the
Climate: Hurricanes & Tropical Storms September 2008.”
September. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?report=tropical-
cyclones&year=2008&month=9&submitted=Get+Report.
Office of the Governor Rick Perry. 2008. “Gov. Perry Suspends Hotel Motel
Tax For Victims Of Hurricane Ike.” September 12.
http://governor.state.tx.us/news/press-release/11131/.

© 2010 Policy Studies Organization


Published by Berkeley Electronic Press
- 189 -
Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, Vol. 1 [2010], Iss. 2, Art. 6

U.S. Air Force Website. 2008. “AMC Aircraft, Airmen Supporting


Hurricane Ike Evacuations.” September
11.http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123114798.

http://www.psocommons.org/rhcpp/vol1/iss2/art6
DOI: 10.2202/1944-4079.1024
- 190 -

You might also like