Runway strip...
 

Am I correct in thinking that the part of the runway strip that is not the 'clear and graded area' is mearly clear of obsticles rather than graded for the weight of any a/c that might come off the RWY?

Cheers

Yup - no requirement for the surface to be able to bear the weight of an aircraft outside the CGA.

Thanks, that clears things up!

Damn,

There I was expecting to see a thread discussing the grooming habits of the fairer sex, and the merits of style choice.

Never mind :{

Yes anotherthing. I was going to reply on that basis until I realised this thread is not in Jetblast.:\

I don't know the provisions in the UK; however, according to the ICAO recommended practices neither the strip nor the graded area has to be load bearing.

According to ICAO Annex 14, Volume I, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.16 and 3.4.17 a defined part of "a strip [...] should be so prepared or constructed as to minimize hazards arising from differences in load bearing capacity to aeroplanes which the runway is intended to serve in the event of an aeroplane running off the runway".

Cheers

hvogt

hvogt, you are, of course, correct. In the UK this RP is interpreted as the CGA needing some load bearing capability although not that needed of the movement area.

In my view this seems like a reasonable interpretation and 'minimize hazards arising from differences in load bearing capacity' is likely to be achieved by a gradual change in load bearing characteristics as you get further from the runway. Hence the CGA needs to be load bearing to an extent - a property that is not required, either explicitly or implied, by other surfaces around a runway (at least that's how I remember it).

But hvogt is correct to point out that the ICAO needs some interpretation.

That's what I had in mind. Thanks Spitoon.