Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

CAT II?

Well, I guess that when the weather conditions hover between CAT1 and 2, they wait a little before going back to CAT1 operations, because should the conditions go back to CAT2, they don’t want any aircraft (at the normal CAT1 hold) to protrude into the CAT2 safety areas and things like that. Still sounds a little odd…

Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

I used to know a man who had a turboprop twin Commander who got himself approved for Cat 2. IIRC, it reduced his minima from 200ft to 150ft. But since nobody can tell (single pilot context) the height at which you got visual, the only point I can see in doing this is that you can land at an airport which is declaring “Cat 2 low visibility procedures in operation” and where you will prob99 get busted (well, get reported by ATC) if you land there and if they can see you are “GA”. This guy loved punishment and would have obtained an ATPL to fly an RV4. In fact I think he had an ATPL, which he did just for the fun of it. He never flew commercially; he made his money by selling out of a very successful software company.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

I remember flying once into Lyon-Bron where the visibility was only 100 meter, so I diverted to the bigger Lyon-Exupery. The (same) controller allowed me to start the approach and gave me (what I remember) an RVR of 550 meters for the first section of the runway, then when established on the ILS he gave me much lower RVR values. The runway had high-intensity approach lights, so I could see these lights more-or-less below me at the minima. Since the approach lights are part of the runway environment I was technically cleared to land. Once on the runway, I could not see the runway itself and had to be given progressive taxi instructions to get off at the right place. Right after me a CJ3 landed. I was in the Cirrus SR22T with Garmin Perspective with synthetic vision and infrared camera, etc. We both were in the same van from the handler that took us to the terminal buidling. He asked me if I saw anything because he had seen nothing. I asked for his instrumentation, but he did not have advanced avionics or radar altimeter. My impression was that the controller helped me get on the ground by giving me higher than actual RVR values to be able to start the approach, but am not sure. Anyways, I did get the impression there that if the minima are below CAT 1, they would still let you land.


On short final


Trying to find my way through progressive taxi instructions in combination with the geo-referenced taxi chart.


Finally parked.

EDLE, Netherlands

Yep, sounds like he wanted to allow you to get in without having to file a report against you. OTOH, why would he want to do so? I mean, the readings off the RVR device surely get logged somehow and if there were an accident, he would be in trouble…

Last Edited by boscomantico at 10 Jan 16:19
Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

ATC never files a report with regard to “busting approach minima”. ATC will never refuse an approach clearance for reasons of low visibility/ceiling.

I don’t know where this myth comes from.

Excellent pictures, Aeroplus !

EBST, Belgium

ATC never files a report with regard to “busting approach minima”

They are required to file a report here in the UK if you bust the “approach ban” (RVR below X m).

I don’t have a reference for the regulation, however. It may be in MATS Part 1 (public) or MATS Part 2 (non public) for each airport.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

However, the approach ban is law for good reason and written in blood.

London area

the approach ban is law for good reason and written in blood.

It would be useful to see the stats on this because it is only at the 1000ft AAL point that it applies. If the RVR falls below the magic value as you descend through 900ft, you can continue. Also the FAA doesn’t operate it for Part 91 ops and they operate the vast majority of the world’s GA, especially IFR GA.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

The approach ban is not so much there for the very marginal cases (RVR hovering 500-600m) as to stop people attempting approaches in manifestly unsuitable weather. The Metroliner crash in Cork is a CAE in point – RVRs around 300m, multiple approaches leading to a loss of control very close to the ground.

To put it into context, CAT II minima puts you about 3-400m from the threshold at 100ft. Half a dot on the localiser isa long way off the Centerline and it’s bloody twitchy to fly.

I am frustrated in these discussions to a certain extent as the evening’s vino interferes with my desire to go near the NTSB database, but I would like to emphasise that anyone thinking that an ILS being CAT II means they can get a way with flying to CAT II minima should think again, as an AAIB bulletin is no way to get your 15 minutes.

Don’t bust minima. Simples.

Last Edited by Josh at 10 Jan 19:41
London area

I have flown to 700m vis with a legal coupled A/P and it is really bad. Cat II is not a joke.

EGTK Oxford
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top