Approach ban
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 148
- Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 2:19 pm
Approach ban
Quick question.
TS A321. CATI ILS on a runway with HIALS but no CL. What is the minimum RVR required to fly the approach and attempt a landing?
TS A321. CATI ILS on a runway with HIALS but no CL. What is the minimum RVR required to fly the approach and attempt a landing?
-
- Rank 5
- Posts: 339
- Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 7:59 am
Re: Approach ban
Without centre-line lighting 3/8 SM or 1600 RVR, assuming standard 1/2 2600 RVR advisory visibility for the CAT 1.
That answer is not TSC specific.
That answer is not TSC specific.
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 148
- Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 2:19 pm
-
- Rank 5
- Posts: 339
- Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 7:59 am
Re: Approach ban
The ops spec requires runway centreline lighting on a CAT 1 for 1200 RVR.
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 148
- Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 2:19 pm
Re: Approach ban
Just curious. My signature below each of my posts doesn’t hide who I am.
I’ll put it to you another way.
At the airport I work at, RVRs dropped down to 1200ft and below for a few hours. Every remaining lander that night diverted (about 10-15 planes) except one. A Transat A321. He landed with the RVR steady at 1200ft throughout his approach.
Hence why I asked.
I’ll put it to you another way.
At the airport I work at, RVRs dropped down to 1200ft and below for a few hours. Every remaining lander that night diverted (about 10-15 planes) except one. A Transat A321. He landed with the RVR steady at 1200ft throughout his approach.
Hence why I asked.
Re: Approach ban
I’m not sure about transat but I was under the impression most larger carriers weren’t using the 1200 RVR CAT 1 ops Spec any more. Where I work we need at least 1600 for a CAT 1 regardless of lighting.
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 148
- Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:12 pm
Re: Approach ban
Does the runway have an LPV with advisory vis of 1/2 sm?
I don't work for Transat, but our ops spec allows for non precision approaches and "approaches with vertical guidance" to 50% without centreline lighting, but you need it for a Cat 1.
Not sure if this is a loophole or if we are all reading it wrong, but the way I take it is if the advisory vis is 1/2 sm, we are good to 1200 RVR on an LPV even without CL Lighting...
If someone can correct me or make more sense of it please do, because I know that this doesn't make sense from a common-sense point of view.
I don't work for Transat, but our ops spec allows for non precision approaches and "approaches with vertical guidance" to 50% without centreline lighting, but you need it for a Cat 1.
Not sure if this is a loophole or if we are all reading it wrong, but the way I take it is if the advisory vis is 1/2 sm, we are good to 1200 RVR on an LPV even without CL Lighting...
If someone can correct me or make more sense of it please do, because I know that this doesn't make sense from a common-sense point of view.
Re: Approach ban
I don't know the specifics at Air Transat, but you are correct that some ops specs allow you to have lower approach ban minima for an LPV than for an ILS.GoinVertical wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:17 pm
Not sure if this is a loophole or if we are all reading it wrong, but the way I take it is if the advisory vis is 1/2 sm, we are good to 1200 RVR on an LPV even without CL Lighting...
Not entirely sure what the idea behind it is. Then again, I'm not entirely sure what the purpose of the approach ban is nowadays.
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Re: Approach ban
I think an RNAV LPV is still considered a "non precision" approach so the ILS CAT1 approach ban doesn't apply to it.
Re: Approach ban
For the purpose of an IFR ride, TC considers a WAAS enabled GPS approach to LPV minimums to be a precision approach.
Why? Due to vertical guidance.
When you consider that the LPV minimums are near or at Cat 1 minimums for several approaches in Canada it validates that supposition.
OPS SPECS are issued carrier specific (but are often similarly worded). Answer to any OPS SPEC question would have to come directly from that carrier.
Why? Due to vertical guidance.
When you consider that the LPV minimums are near or at Cat 1 minimums for several approaches in Canada it validates that supposition.
OPS SPECS are issued carrier specific (but are often similarly worded). Answer to any OPS SPEC question would have to come directly from that carrier.
Re: Approach ban
Interesting because for the enforcement of the approach ban a RNAV LPV is still considered non-precision... unless that has changed.
-
- Rank 7
- Posts: 505
- Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:28 pm
- Location: YKF
Re: Approach ban
What TC allows as practice (LPV instead of ILS for a check ride), isn't consistent with real world application or the regulations. A LPV approach is not a precision approach. They're just using it as practice because it's "good enough" to test a candidate (just like a hood is "good enough" to simulate IMC).
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 148
- Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 2:19 pm
Re: Approach ban
Yes it does.GoinVertical wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:17 pm Does the runway have an LPV with advisory vis of 1/2 sm?
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 148
- Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:12 pm
Re: Approach ban
24L in YUL is my guess? I was flying that night just before the fog rolled in. If they are LPV equipped and their Ops Spec reads the same as ours then I guess the LPV is legal at RVR1200 even without CL Lighting. Maybe someone from Transat can contribute.thenoflyzone wrote: ↑Sun Feb 16, 2020 10:59 pmYes it does.GoinVertical wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:17 pm Does the runway have an LPV with advisory vis of 1/2 sm?
Re: Approach ban
At Jazz:thenoflyzone wrote: ↑Thu Feb 13, 2020 7:27 pm Quick question.
TS A321. CATI ILS on a runway with HIALS but no CL. What is the minimum RVR required to fly the approach and attempt a landing?
ILS CAT I:
1200 RVR with HUD
1800 RVR without HUD
LPV/LNAV/VNAV or any Non Precision Approach:
2400 RVR at the lowest (variables that can raise that though)
Re: Approach ban
thenoflyzone wrote: ↑Thu Feb 13, 2020 7:27 pm Quick question.
TS A321. CATI ILS on a runway with HIALS but no CL. What is the minimum RVR required to fly the approach and attempt a landing?
What airport?
And was it a c- registration?
At my company ops spec 75 allows us 3/8sm 1600RVR (=1/2sm 2600RVR) Canada.
And our U.S. Foreign Ops Spec allows reduced CAT 1 landing minimum has lows a 1800RVR with or without including airports with, but inoperative TDZ, RCL lights IAW the following:
The authorized aircraft is equipped with an approved FD, AP, or HUD approved for at least CAT 1 that provides guidance to a DA.
Provided the note at the bottom of the approach plate says you can.
If they knew the RVR was below minimums before crossing the FAF, they should've discontinued the approach.
Or maybe they took it upon themselves to set up a CAT 2.
Or maybe they just didn't give a f***.
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 148
- Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 2:19 pm
Re: Approach ban
You're good. Then again, my location does say YUL.....Pretty easy to deduce the rest from there.
Wow. Besides the 1200ft with HUD, those are pretty restrictive compared to other Canadian operators.airway wrote: ↑Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:56 pmAt Jazz:thenoflyzone wrote: ↑Thu Feb 13, 2020 7:27 pm Quick question.
TS A321. CATI ILS on a runway with HIALS but no CL. What is the minimum RVR required to fly the approach and attempt a landing?
ILS CAT I:
1200 RVR with HUD
1800 RVR without HUD
LPV/LNAV/VNAV or any Non Precision Approach:
2400 RVR at the lowest (variables that can raise that though)
YULGoHomeLeg wrote: ↑Tue Feb 18, 2020 6:48 pmthenoflyzone wrote: ↑Thu Feb 13, 2020 7:27 pm Quick question.
TS A321. CATI ILS on a runway with HIALS but no CL. What is the minimum RVR required to fly the approach and attempt a landing?
What airport?
And was it a c- registration?
All TS A321s are C- registered.
Re: Approach ban
24L YUL. AC A319/320/321 limited to 1800 RVR.
To be honest I’ve never been able to figure out how airlines get authorization to go below the published visibility. If the designers of the approach say you need 2600RVR to do the approach safely, why would the regulating body say “naw, we’ll let certain guys go lower than that”? Perfect example of it biting people in the ass: AC in YHZ. Without the ops spec that accident doesn’t happen.
To be honest I’ve never been able to figure out how airlines get authorization to go below the published visibility. If the designers of the approach say you need 2600RVR to do the approach safely, why would the regulating body say “naw, we’ll let certain guys go lower than that”? Perfect example of it biting people in the ass: AC in YHZ. Without the ops spec that accident doesn’t happen.
Re: Approach ban
Jazz's visibility chart is the same or very close to AC's.
I was there when they implemented the new approach bans because of Halifax.
Keep in mind Jazz also can hand fly a CAT3 ILS all the way in with a DH of 50'
I was there when they implemented the new approach bans because of Halifax.
Keep in mind Jazz also can hand fly a CAT3 ILS all the way in with a DH of 50'