In an era marked by modernization in civil aviation and airport infrastructure, Indonesia’s air transport system has made commendable strides, from upgraded terminals to expanded connectivity. However, behind this impressive progress lies a technical yet critical issue that has not received the attention it deserves: the transition from the Aircraft Classification Number / Pavement Classification Number (ACN/PCN) system to the more advanced Aircraft Classification Rating / Pavement Classification Rating (ACR/PCR) system in evaluating runway pavement capacity.
Although the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) officially introduced the ACR/PCR framework in 2020 through Doc 9981 and Annex 14 Volume I Amendment 14, Indonesia has yet to align its national implementation. This lack of progress raises concerns not only about compliance with global standards but also about long-term safety, maintenance efficiency, and asset optimization across our airports.
Why It Matters: ACR/PCR as a Realistic and Safety-Centric System
The ACR/PCR system provides a more realistic and dynamic way to match aircraft loading with pavement strength. Unlike its predecessor, which used static and sometimes outdated values, ACR/PCR captures the actual interaction between an aircraft’s gear setup and the pavement’s structural features. This is especially important as modern aircraft are heavier, more complex, and require more precise compatibility with runway infrastructure.:
- Aircraft operation safety by ensuring that runways are not overstressed.
- Runway maintenance planning through more accurate prediction of wear and structural fatigue.
- Airport capacity management, particularly for busy or secondary airports aiming to attract new traffic without compromising safety.
Despite its benefits and ICAO’s formal mandate, the adoption of ACR/PCR across Indonesian airports has been sporadic and largely symbolic. Most entries in Indonesia’s Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP) still rely on conventional PCN values, indicating little progress in real-world implementation.
The Underlying Challenges
This lag in implementation is not due to a lack of will, but rather a constellation of systemic, institutional, and technical barriers:
1. Historical Dependence and Limited Technical Familiarity
The ACN/PCN system has been the global standard since the 1980s. Over the decades, it has become deeply integrated into Indonesia’s civil aviation engineering practices. Many airport engineers, regulators, and consultants are well-versed in PCN but are unfamiliar with ACR/PCR’s detailed methodology. Additionally, most civil aviation training institutions and technical universities in Indonesia have not yet included the ACR/PCR framework in their curricula. This creates a generational gap in knowledge, leaving airport authorities reliant on outdated tools and calculations.
2. Absence of National Technical Regulation
Despite ICAO’s mandate, there is no binding regulation from Indonesia’s Ministry of Transportation or the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) that explicitly requires the use of ACR/PCR at all airports. The absence of a national roadmap, technical guidelines, or deadline for transition has left operators—such as PT Angkasa Pura I & II and regional airport units (UPBU)—without regulatory or budgetary justification to initiate change.
In short, without a clear legal foundation, no significant structural transformation can take place.
3. Inadequate Infrastructure and Data Collection Tools
To calculate accurate PCR values, airports need up-to-date pavement data—such as pavement layer thickness, subgrade properties, modulus of elasticity, crack conditions, and deflections. These assessments require specialized tools like Falling Weight Deflectometers (FWDs) and Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR), which are costly and scarce, especially in remote or underfunded regions.
Moreover, even when data collection is feasible, many regions lack the expertise to interpret and translate raw field data into a validated PCR value. This infrastructure deficit perpetuates the inertia.
4. Changes in Aeronautical Information Systems
The shift to ACR/PCR goes beyond engineering—it also affects how airport data is presented in aviation databases such as the AIP, Jeppesen charts, and digital navigation platforms. This means a coordinated effort across multiple stakeholders: the Directorate of Air Navigation, AirNav Indonesia, airline dispatchers, and civil aviation units.
Modifying aviation information systems requires rigorous validation, testing, and error-proofing. Without a centralized strategy for digital integration, the risk of data inconsistency or system misalignment is high, posing serious implications for flight safety.
5. Lack of External Pressure from ICAO Audits
To date, Indonesia’s slow transition to ACR/PCR has not been flagged as a major concern in ICAO’s Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP). Consequently, the issue does not receive high-priority attention from national regulators. It falls behind more politically visible issues such as airspace restructuring, navigation modernization, or air traffic services.
Ironically, because ACR/PCR has not emerged as a “red flag” issue, it receives neither resources nor executive urgency. Yet in the long term, misaligned pavement ratings could lead to multi-million-dollar rehabilitation costs or even runway damage caused by overloaded aircraft.
Charting a Strategic Way Forward
While the inertia is real, it is not irreversible. Indonesia has the institutional capacity and technical talent to leapfrog—if the right policy levers are pulled. The following actions could catalyse meaningful progress:
1. Issue a Ministerial Technical Regulation
The Ministry of Transportation should urgently issue a technical regulation mandating the nationwide transition to ACR/PCR within the next 3–5 years. This should be accompanied by a phased implementation plan, with clear benchmarks for different airport categories and infrastructure readiness.
2. National Training and Certification Program
The Human Resources Development Agency for Transportation (BPSDMP) should design and deliver nationwide certification programs for airport pavement engineers and safety inspectors. These programs must be accredited and synchronized with ICAO standards, ensuring uniform competency across regions. Additionally, aviation polytechnics should update their curriculum to include the ACR/PCR methodology.
3. Launch a National Pavement Assessment Program
Indonesia could initiate a multi-year airport pavement evaluation program, leveraging university partnerships, engineering research institutes, and state-owned engineering firms. This would not only create a national database of PCR values but also stimulate academic-industry collaboration in applied aviation infrastructure.
4. Digitize the AIP and Integrate PCR into Aviation Data Systems
As ACR/PCR values are standardized, corresponding updates in AIP format and digital platforms must follow. A task force involving AirNav Indonesia, DGCA’s IT division, and airline flight planning departments should be established to ensure system compatibility, safety validation, and seamless rollout.
5. Provide Incentives for Early Adopters
Airports that proactively implement ACR/PCR ahead of the national schedule could be rewarded through prioritization in route development funding, performance-based assessments, or international slot allocation. These incentives would align airport-level initiatives with national aviation development goals.
The Bigger Picture: A Leap Toward Smarter Aviation Governance
Transitioning to ACR/PCR may seem like a technical footnote in the grand narrative of Indonesia’s aviation modernization. Yet it is, in fact, a litmus test of our institutional readiness to evolve with global best practices. It reflects our ability to move from compliance to leadership in aviation safety, infrastructure sustainability, and data-driven policy.
More importantly, the adoption of ACR/PCR is not just about updating numbers in a chart. It is about extending the lifespan of our runways, protecting multi-billion-dollar public investments, and ensuring that modern aircraft—such as the Airbus A350 or Boeing 777X—can operate safely across a wider network of Indonesian airports.
Closing Thoughts
Indonesia’s aviation system has reached a tipping point. The next phase of growth will not be driven solely by the addition of more terminals or new flight routes. It will depend on how we manage, maintain, and modernize the invisible backbone of aviation safety—our runways and their pavement systems.
The transition from ACN/PCN to ACR/PCR is an obligation under ICAO policy. But more than that, it is an opportunity. An opportunity to demonstrate that Indonesia is not merely adapting to global standards but can set them.
We need to move beyond pilot projects, studies, and tentative assessments. What we require is a national leap—an unmistakable signal to the world that Indonesia takes aviation safety seriously, right down to the structural details that make every take-off and landing safe.
Let us not wait for an audit finding, a runway incident, or an aircraft refusal to land due to outdated ratings. Let this transition be proactive, strategic, and above all, visionary.
Indonesia’s aviation sector deserves a runway not just to take off, but to lead.
