When runway 11/29 reopens 5 months from now it will have Cat III on both ends. I'm just wondering what airlines flying into there can do Cat III approaches and what their limits are. I'll start, Jazz RJ's and Q400's have HUD and can do Cat IIIA approaches with 50 ft DH and 600 RVR required. Crosswind limits 13kt for the RJ and 15kt for the Q

I don't think anyone is approved for CAT3 in Canada. It's probably for enroute alternates going/coming overseas, and/or to attract cargo carrier as a jumping off point.

Air Transat (330, 310, 737). No DH, 20kts on the A330, probably the same for the two other types.

icewa wrote:I don't think anyone is approved for CAT3 in Canada. It's probably for enroute alternates going/coming overseas, and/or to attract cargo carrier as a jumping off point.

Air Canada is and although I can't quote their FOM I would be shocked if Air Transat, Jazz, Westjet, Sunwing, Canjet and Cargojet were not. Probably more as well.

icewa wrote:I don't think anyone is approved for CAT3 in Canada. It's probably for enroute alternates going/coming overseas, and/or to attract cargo carrier as a jumping off point.

Focus man....focus

I said Jazz is and even gave their limitations. I'm sure many others are

WJA is CAT IIIa. 50 ft DH RA. RVR 600 A (required) and B (required) and C.

Cargojet is approved for CAT III operations.

It's great YYT is upgrading their approaches, but there are going to be a lot of days over the next few months when no one can get in with only 16/34 operational. Particularly for those aircraft without RNAV approach capability. Here's hoping for a calm and clear summer on The Rock (yeah right).

CCR wrote:WJA is CAT IIIa. 50 ft DH RA. RVR 600 A (required) and B (required) and C.

Does Encore have HUD in their Q400s ?

No HGS in the Encore machines. I believe that they cost $1 000 000 to install per machine. At one of the town halls, management said that the amount of times Encore forecast that they would get you in somewhere, it was much cheaper to go to an alternate and either pay for a second attempt or bus people in. Pretty expensive toys for the amount of use they would get.

I believe that WS actually pulled their systems out of the 737's that had them installed. I guess there must be some certification cost involved every once in a while also.

Don't need a HUD or HGS to be CAT IIIa certified anyway...

SWG is CAT II.
I've been here for ten years and used it twice.
How often have you guys used CAT III?

Jean-Luc Monette wrote:Don't need a HUD or HGS to be CAT IIIa certified anyway...

I thought you needed either HGS or autoland for CATIII

av8ts wrote:

Jean-Luc Monette wrote:Don't need a HUD or HGS to be CAT IIIa certified anyway...

I thought you needed either HGS or autoland for CATIII

No HUD in the TS A310s or B738s. (I've not been on the A330s in forever now.)

Jean-Luc can probably clear up whether it's IIIb or IIIa... Can't remember what we ticked off in the logbooks now.

Awesome. It's about time!

We hold YYT/YHZ as enroute alternates all the time when operating to JFK/BOS/IAD/ORD, will be nice to have a more viable option for those occasional (*cough*) poor wx days in YYT.

Cat IIIb no DH. Autoland X-wind limit 25kts. (Emirates B777)

HGS(synonymous with HUD) will get you CAT IIIA if it is hand flown which requires 600RVR on all transmissometers and has a DH of 50 feet. Jazz DH4 and RJ have HGS but no autoland so they are CAT IIIA. My understanding was that auto land got you CAT IIIB regardless of whether you also had a HGS or not). CAT IIIBstill has the 600RVR requirement but allows a DH of 0(essentially no minimums). Westjet's 737 have auto land so why are they CATIIIA and not CAT IIIB ?

hithere wrote:HGS(synonymous with HUD) will get you CAT IIIA if it is hand flown which requires 600RVR on all transmissometers and has a DH of 50 feet. Jazz DH4 and RJ have HGS but no autoland so they are CAT IIIA. My understanding was that auto land got you CAT IIIB regardless of whether you also had a HGS or not). CAT IIIBstill has the 600RVR requirement but allows a DH of 0(essentially no minimums). Westjet's 737 have auto land so why are they CATIIIA and not CAT IIIB ?

My guess would be that WJ 737s only have 2 fail passive autopilots. It's been a while but if I recall correctly to get IIIb you need 3 fail operational autopilots.

The CATIIIA restriction with 50ft DH on 737 is also in part due to the fact the A/C has no rollout function, so runway tracking after touchdown is maintained by the pilot. Hence the 50ft DH.

BE20 Driver wrote:Pretty expensive toys for the amount of use they would get.

If used properly and during all phases of flight, it is hardly a toy. There is a lot more benefit to it than just being able to conduct Category 3 approaches.

hithere wrote:HGS(synonymous with HUD)

A HUD is part of an HGS. However you can have a HUD that is not part of an HGS. Two very different things. It's not the HUD that allows the Jazz RJ and Q fleets to do CAT3a. It's the HGS.

Mr. 3Green wrote:The CATIIIA restriction with 50ft DH on 737 is also in part due to the fact the A/C has no rollout function, so runway tracking after touchdown is maintained by the pilot. Hence the 50ft DH.

That is correct. Either way, CAT III B approaches aren't authorised in Canada. The lowest any Canadian airport has are CAT IIIA approaches with a DH of 50 ft.

Only YVR, YYC, YYZ and YYT have CAT III A approaches in Canada.

YWG, YUL, YMX, YHM and YHZ are only CAT II.

All the other airports in Canada are CAT I or less.

When I was at Jazz I flew both the CRJ and the 757. The RJ was CATIII using the HGS with a decision height of 50'. It was hand flown and you had to see the "runway environment" or you went around. In the 757 we did CATIII approaches using three autopilots, again with a decision height of 50' but all you had to see was LAND3 in the annunciator. It was conceivable that you could land, rollout and brake to a stop without seeing anything. The only thing you had to do manually was deploy the reversers. I'm now at Sunwing and we do CATII approaches in the 737 using two autopilots. DH is 100' and you have to have the "runway environment". The autopilot is to be disconnected at nosewheel touchdown and the rollout is steered manually. In all cases RVR's were off the plates but as far as I remember CATIII was 600 and CATII 1200. All decision heights are height above threshold so what you set for minimums on the RADALT may vary depending on the terrain prior to the threshold.

In the 757 we did CATIII approaches using three autopilots, again with a decision height of 50' but all you had to see was LAND3 in the annunciator. It was conceivable that you could land, rollout and brake to a stop without seeing anything.

Hmmm. According to another post there are no CATIIIB (aka "zero-zero") approaches in Canada. I can't be bothered to confirm that, actually I'm kinda surprised (well, not really) that even YVR or YYZ doesn't have 3B. But from my admittedly imperfect memory, for any other approach there are visual reference requirements.

CATII: 3 consecutive lights + a lateral element
CATIIIA: 3 consecutive lights
CATIIIB with DH: 1 centreline light
CATIIIB with no DH: no requirement for visual contact

You would definitely have to see more than just "LAND3" on the first three approaches and the fourth isn't available in Canada apparently. Apologies for the pedantry, I'm studying for some stupid exams on this stuff!

Did a cat3 dual on 321 in Yyz no DA....600rvr don't forget to disconnect the ap to turn off..

Interesting. Wonder why Sunwing is only CAT II? We know the 737 can do CATIIIA, so is it a crew restriction? insurance? Savings on training costs? Less components to maintain on the 737?

I can see that there might not be an immediate need to certify the crew for CATIII. As I said, only 4 Canadian airports have it, and virtually no airports in the Caribbean have CATII, much less CATIII. Heck, most don't even have a CAT I ILS.

In our operation we fly in meters.

A340 is certified for Cat3b no DH operations. This just requires 75m RVR.

There is no requirement to see anything prior to touchdown and after touchdown we need to have 1 centerline light in sight (EASA).

We are allowed to take-off with 125m RVR.

All of the above assumes the appropriate lighting and ILS calibration exist.

I've never flown in actual Cat3B weather - I've always seen the runway around 50'.

I've done a 200m RVR take-off in Milan - it was hard to even taxi to the runway.

At a previous company all landings below Cat1 limits were mandatory autolands. Nice and simple.

Some fleets at AC are approved to CAT III(b) limits (no DH/RVR 150ft), in Canada however the lowest limits are No DH/RVR 600. The RVR limits are due to airport lighting as far as I know and level of service, none of which provide less than 600 feet required visibility.