Clearway at UK airports
Thread Starter
Clearway at UK airports
From CAP 168:-
I'm pretty sure that at some UK airfields the clearway extends outside the airport boundary (e.g. LTN RW 26). I'm interested to know how in these cases "under control of the airport authority" is exercised? One presumes that "aerodrome boundary" is the limit of land owned by the airport.
Thanks for any help.
A clearway need not have bearing strength and may be land or water. It may extend outside the aerodrome boundary only if the aerodrome authority establishes such control that will ensure that the clearway will be kept free from obstacles or that the clearway plane will not be infringed.
(EU OPS)
clearway’ means a defined rectangular area on the ground or water under the control of the appropriate authority, selected or prepared as a suitable area over which an aeroplane may make a portion of its initial climb to a specified height;
clearway’ means a defined rectangular area on the ground or water under the control of the appropriate authority, selected or prepared as a suitable area over which an aeroplane may make a portion of its initial climb to a specified height;
Thanks for any help.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 58
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
means they have control over what goes in the area.
Ie nobody can poke things into the protected area.
You can have restrictions in place which means the airport can veto things happening outside its owned land.
Ie nobody can poke things into the protected area.
You can have restrictions in place which means the airport can veto things happening outside its owned land.
If I remember correctly, the minimum clearway you can declare is 60m, however this is all some airport operators do declare even when the first significant obstacle is much further from the end of TORA.
Why is this I wonder; airport owner too lazy to get a survey done?
Unfortunately the operators have to use the published figures and I have known this to cause an aircraft to have to depart with a reduced fuel load then make a tech stop to pick up more fuel for the journey, rather than go non-stop.
Why is this I wonder; airport owner too lazy to get a survey done?
Unfortunately the operators have to use the published figures and I have known this to cause an aircraft to have to depart with a reduced fuel load then make a tech stop to pick up more fuel for the journey, rather than go non-stop.
Presumably the cost of doing so is judged to be more than the perceived benefit, from the airport's point of view. If so, that's just business.
I'll take comfort from that fact, next time I fly.
Happens at LCY six times a week ...
Unfortunately the operators have to use the published figures
I have known this to cause an aircraft to have to depart with a reduced fuel load then make a tech stop to pick up more fuel for the journey, rather than go non-stop.
'Kept clear of obstacles'... Does this mean non-frangible obstacles, such that vehicles and sheds are not permitted, but hedges, fences and grazing animals are permitted.?
.
.
So a grazing cow (which I wouldn't class as a frangible object!) that's, say, 1.5 m tall would be OK provided that it's at least 120 m from the start of the clearway.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: England
Posts: 762
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand it's any obstacle whether frangible or not. I think the term frangible relates to being on the ground rather than airborne. I seem to recall somewhere in CAP168 it mentions 0.9m metre height being the limit before something is considered an obstacle in a clearway.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Muscat
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I remember correctly, the minimum clearway you can declare is 60m, however this is all some airport operators do declare even when the first significant obstacle is much further from the end of TORA.
Why is this I wonder; airport owner too lazy to get a survey done?
Unfortunately the operators have to use the published figures and I have known this to cause an aircraft to have to depart with a reduced fuel load then make a tech stop to pick up more fuel for the journey, rather than go non-stop.
Why is this I wonder; airport owner too lazy to get a survey done?
Unfortunately the operators have to use the published figures and I have known this to cause an aircraft to have to depart with a reduced fuel load then make a tech stop to pick up more fuel for the journey, rather than go non-stop.
Length of runway strips
3.4.2 A strip shall extend before the threshold and beyond the end of the runway or stopway for a distance of at least:
— 60 m where the code number is 2, 3 or 4;
— 60 m where the code number is 1 and the runway is an instrument one; and
— 30 m where the code number is 1 and the runway is a non-instrument one.
A clearway has to be under the control of the airport operator, so if there is anything outside the strip that is under the control of the adjacent land owner then the airport cant declare this, even if obstacle free.
But then most runways require a RESA
3.5.1 A runway end safety area shall be provided at each end of a runway strip where:
— the code number is 3 or 4; and
— the code number is 1 or 2 and the runway is an instrument one.
Annex 14 says objects in the strip should as far as practical be removed. So I guess if the adjacent land owner doesn't remove his objects then they can't be forced to.