commit aviation
Thanks for that and I'm aware of the ICAO RESA requirement and the fact that the CAA has adopted it. I just wonder why 'the safety case' at LTN doesn't dictate that a RESA of at least 90m is deemed necessary.
pabely
I did wonder if the CAA only imposes a RESA requirement when a runway is extended; that has certainly been the case with SEN and IOM, plus I believe, GLO recently. There would seem to be no logic in that though surely. If an extended runway needs a RESA why should an existing runway not need one? I cannot find anything in CAP 168 to the affect that existing runways are exempt.
A RESA does not necessarily need to be an additional area beyond the runway strip, but can be formed by part of the existing runway. In those cases the declared distances are reduced by that amount which is declared to be a RESA.