Scope and review guidance
Known Limitations
This page documents what the current release does not calculate, where professional review is still required, and why a result may remain not evaluated without reducing the planning value of supported-scope outputs.
Current limitation
Unencoded or partial criteria
- Any surface or branch criteria with TODO or PARTIAL rule-pack status remain not evaluated or require follow-on professional review.
- 14 CFR Part 77 includes heliport criteria under 77.23, but this release does not yet encode those heliport surfaces and does not infer them from fixed-wing airport criteria.
- FAA AC heliport / rotor-wing design criteria require a separate criteria pack and are not inferred from fixed-wing runway design rows in this release.
- UFC Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and rotor-wing / heliport paths are not fully encoded today.
- Some FAA airport design criteria remain partial and should not be presented as complete obstruction determinations.
- Civil Part 77 mixed runway-end horizontal-perimeter construction is not fully modeled because the current input set does not yet collect separate approach classifications for both runway ends.
- Civil Part 77 precision transitional overlays remain contextual plan-view approximations and do not yet render the full 5,000 ft beyond-conical extension geometry as a source-exact map footprint.
Current limitation
Geometry and input limits
- The evaluator depends on user-entered elevations, distances, coordinates, and active runway geometry. Bad inputs will produce bad outputs.
- Map and engineering graphics use available threshold/runway geometry. They are not a substitute for a full surveyed airport layout, terrain model, or formal GIS study.
- Manual overrides remain available because some engineering use cases require local project judgment rather than auto-filled geometry alone.
Current limitation
Authority and acceptance
- The software does not decide which authority legally controls a project. The evaluator must choose the applicable criteria for the project context.
- The software does not replace FAA 7460 review, DoD siting review, airport sponsor review, or licensed engineering judgment.
- The software does not guarantee FAA, DoD, or airport acceptance of any result, waiver, or obstruction determination.
Current limitation
Cases requiring professional review
- Any result marked Not Evaluated or supported by partial rule logic requires follow-on review before design, permitting, or siting decisions.
- Instrument procedure effects, TERPS interactions, airspace determinations, local airport standards, and waiver pathways remain outside the automated scope of the current release.
Preliminary Evaluation Statement
Required context
Disclaimer
- Clear Path is designed to evaluate submitted inputs against the published criteria implemented in the software for planning, design review, internal quality control, and operational decision-making workflows. Results are not official FAA, DoD, airport sponsor, engineering, surveying, or legal determinations.
- References to FAA, DoD, UFC, Part 77, airport criteria, or source documents identify evaluation inputs only and do not imply endorsement, sponsorship, authorization, or official status by any agency, command, military unit, or airport authority.
- Results depend on user-provided data, selected criteria, available source logic, and known limitations in the current release.
- Final filing, approval, and enforcement authority remains with the applicable FAA, DoD, airport sponsor, or other authority having jurisdiction. Users are responsible for verifying all inputs, assumptions, criteria, and outputs before relying on results for formal submissions, approvals, construction, acquisition, operations, or compliance actions.
- For support or interpretation questions, include the report timestamp, airport, runway, runway end, and criteria profile. Clear Path support can help explain workflow and report structure but does not issue approvals or certifications.