@ Emir
IIRC you have to pass a theoretical and practical (mostly simulator) training for LVO and CAT II & III and you will get a license entry.
Also your aircraft and Copilot has to be LVO rated. So I think 400m is really the minimum. But you can taxi to the runway and count the runway lights you see and when you get your 400m along your required take-off length you can do the take-off even when the ATIS or RVR says it’s only 300m. (not allowed in certain countries e.g. Saudi-Arabia IIRC)
nobbi wrote:
@ Emir
IIRC you have to pass a theoretical and practical (mostly simulator) training for LVO and CAT II & III and you will get a license entry.
There is usually a difference between low vis takeoffs down to 150m and those below. While the former now need aproval, it is less difficult than the more formal LVO and Cat II/III Approvals.
APPLICATION FOR LOW VISIBILITY OPERATIONS APPROVAL
Applicants are strongly advised to read the ’ Notes for Completion’ before completing the form. Please complete the form in BLOCK CAPITALS using black or dark blue ink.
This form is designed to elicit all the required information from those operators wishing to gain operational approval to operate to:
• lower than Standard CAT I;
• CAT II;
• other than Standard CAT II; or
• CAT III
approach minima and to take off in less than 150 m visibility for Category A, B and C aircraft, and less than 200 m for Category D aircraft. (Note: Take-off in less than 400 m visibility but more than 150 m/200 m is now subject to formal approval).
But you can taxi to the runway and count the runway lights you see and when you get your 400m along your required take-off length you can do the take-off even when the ATIS or RVR says it’s only 300m. (not allowed in certain countries e.g. Saudi-Arabia IIRC)
Not sure allowed in Europe any more. Reported RVR is usually constraining.
Not sure allowed in Europe any more. Reported RVR is usually constraining
I think that would make sense today because of traffic ATC won’t allow you any more to taxi down the runway and count the lights …
The RVR is not always available at every airport. It that case, the counting of lights might still work.
So since we’ve moved from approach to minimas to take offs with low RVR, how do you make the decision to go no go in an SEP? To me this is one of the highest risk maneuvers in a single. More so than night IFR, flying over water, enroute IMC etc…
An engine failure (or any other problem requiring immediate return) on TO is unlikely (we wouldn’t be taking off in such conditions otherwise) but surely is 99% likely to end very badly. You have no height and no options and even if you do know the area very well you will be unable to know exactly where that power line, rock car park etc is? What are your views?
@LFHN I would use the logic of the Net Take Off Flight Plath for multi engine operations, which suggests in the case of a single engine maintaining VMC until obstacles in the departure area have been cleared if you are not able to develop a NTOFP after engine failure, which by definition you can’t in a single.
If there are no obstacles I would suggest 800’ and two miles which is typical low vis for a bad weather circuit.
how do you make the decision to go no go in an SEP?
It is the time window during which an engine failure would end badly.
There are plenty of them in flying though usually they are quite short.
I would not do it in a rented plane 
Peter wrote:
It is the time window during which an engine failure would end badly.
Which in a single means departing in fog equals no options should the engine quit.
I have done it but we do need to be realistic that in that scenario you are entirely relying on the engine not stopping.
Flying single engine or multi-engine aircraft involves taking a certain risk for granted. Some are accepting and at ease with more risk than others.
I take off in low visibility and of course hope that the engine will not quit right at that moment. If it would happen, you all will be discussing the case here on this forum. It would be a disaster if the engine did right after rotation in a single engine aircraft, but probably also be a hard situation to manage in a twin-engine aircraft.
It is the same story with night flying single engine aircraft, flying over water, etc. We all accept in one way or the other that flying small piston aircraft comes with more risk than flying on board an airliner.
If others are on board, such as passengers, family members, the wife, then I explain as good as I can what I want to do (low visibility departure) and give them the option to stay and wait or go.
Aviathor wrote:
I suppose it would be the country of residence of the operator.
This is surprising – I would expect other options (CAA of country of departure airport or CAA of country of registry).
