CAT3 YYT
Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako
Re: CAT3 YYT
Will be an improvement, however, a Cat II on 11 or 16 would be much more beneficial. I have never missed in YYT when the ability to use 600 RVR on 29 would make a difference. 100 RA on 11 or 16 could have made things much easier a few times.
ILS on 34 wouldn't hurt either, but our RNP gets us almost to 200' anyway.
SMP
ILS on 34 wouldn't hurt either, but our RNP gets us almost to 200' anyway.
SMP
-
complexintentions
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2186
- Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:49 pm
- Location: of my pants is unknown.
Re: CAT3 YYT
Can any of the resident NavCan experts shed some light on what is required to certify an approach from Cat II to III standards? (Equipment/regulatory etc). I would have thought it would be fairly minor since the signal protection requirements for Cat II are already in place...?
Cat 3 in YYT would definitely help make YYT a more useable diversion airport for crossing the pond and runway 29 makes sense if you're only going to put one in what with runway length being limiting otherwise. But I seem to recall landing looking out the side window more often than not in Torbay...have to agree that a Cat II or higher to 16 would be nice for daily ops...
Cat 3 in YYT would definitely help make YYT a more useable diversion airport for crossing the pond and runway 29 makes sense if you're only going to put one in what with runway length being limiting otherwise. But I seem to recall landing looking out the side window more often than not in Torbay...have to agree that a Cat II or higher to 16 would be nice for daily ops...
I’m still waiting for my white male privilege membership card. Must have gotten lost in the mail.
Re: CAT3 YYT
Be nice to have CAT3 on all four runways and I would start with 11 in my perfect world. Reality being what it is (dollars, TDZL already there) I think having it on 29 is a great improvemnt based on 30 years of flying in and out of YYT. Case in point: We just had a 36 hour fog "event" when the RVRs were below 1200 most of the time. The wind was steady from the southeast the whole time with the result that the tailwind component on 29 was below 10kts (My company's limit for CAT 2/3). All jokes about 0 vis and 40kts aside, winds are generally pretty light when RVR is below 1200 and all those diverted/cancelled flights would have got in. CAT 2 on 16 wouldn't have helped. If those SE winds are strong enough to mandate 16 then generally the vis is better than 1200.
My contact in the airport authority says other improvements are being looked at including CAT3 on 11. Perhaps CAT 2 on 16 is also a possibility but the runway is a bit short for oceanic traffic to be interested and I think this might be part of the thinking. As for 34, vis is usually only a problem in the winter in daytime snow squalls and I'm not sure terrain would allow for any level of frontcourse ILS.
My contact in the airport authority says other improvements are being looked at including CAT3 on 11. Perhaps CAT 2 on 16 is also a possibility but the runway is a bit short for oceanic traffic to be interested and I think this might be part of the thinking. As for 34, vis is usually only a problem in the winter in daytime snow squalls and I'm not sure terrain would allow for any level of frontcourse ILS.
