Any Cat IIIc Operators?

[Continuous Ignition]

Can someone give me an idea of what airlines and their fleet types that are Cat IIIc certified?

Info needed to settle discussion raised during HUD class today.

Thanks!

[reimers]

LH might soon start NO DH approaches (75 m RVR) in their A340 and A320 family fleets. No modification nessecary, only SIM training and updated procedures required.

[Herod]

KLMuk Fokker 100 fleet has had no DH and 75m RVR for about five years now, but that is 3B. As far as I know, 3C is zero/zero

[fadec_primary_channel]

I think that CAT IIIc requires taxiway "localisers", as <75m rvr is the objective. The a/c can land in 0m its just us pilots that can't see to taxi as you are well aware. Therefore taxiway guidance is needed, as far as I know the cost of the infrastructure required, stopped most airfields implementing it. It requires the taxiways to be excavated and the guidance inset in the tarmac(Best solution at the time) to insure that interference of guidance did not occur. Furthermore, the tower were unable to observe A/C taxiing, also in the event of fire no services could reach the a/c and it required a constant commentary by the ground controller using the ASMI to get the services to the a/c. All of which (at the time) was deemed too expensive/complicated, so failed the cost/benefit analysis. Most airfields only experienced the weather phenomenom rarely, and often at times when no flights were operated. Thus further negating the need for the technology.

A bit rambling but hope it hepls, happy to be corrected. ;)

[ 28 September 2001: Message edited by: fadec_primary_channel ]

[Eff Oh]

CatIIIB No DH/RVR 75m.

CatIIIC No DH/RVR 0m.

As far as I am aware no Cat IIIc operators exist. As said above, the aircraft can do it (coz it does't know what the RVR is) effectively RVR doesn't matter to the aircraft! However its the pilots being able to operate the aircraft on the ground, that is the problem. I have never heard of one of these approaches being made. I can only imagine that it could be used to land in an RVR below 75m, in an emergency (fuel leak etc.) Just my thoughts....
Eff Oh.

[eaglet-WestBourne]

CATIIIc is an ICAO annex 6 definition: no DH, no RVR
CAT III B runway is defined in JAR-AWO (autopilots):no DH, RVR not less than 75m
which is the current JAR minimum.

[Narada]

A tidbit -

I believe the only aircraft that was ever certified for CatIIIC Autoland was the Lockheed L-1011 (NICE airplane).

[FE Hoppy]

L1011s with PVD (paravisual Display) and a ground run monitor could IIIC on the runway but getting off is the problem. I dont think there is a IIIc runway anywhere so it´s a hypothetical problem. IIIb is nice though but IIIA is good enough. My current company can´t even manage cat II right now.

[twistedenginestarter]

As I recall the Trident was Cat IIIb with a decision at 12 feet (?) but did have landing run (manual) guidance with para-visual directors/peripheral visions displays which were barbers pole's below the windscreen. I think these also worked in flight. Anyway, that rather suggests there was somewhere with runway guidance. Heathow presumably?

[wysiwyg]

and precisely what use is 3C if having landed there is no guidance to actually vacate the runway...

answers not required, question is rhetorical

[twistedenginestarter]

Why? - You wouldn't have to divert. Ground manouevring - Heathrow has ground radar to direct you.

Probably the reason against is eg London-Glasgow, the number of days you lose by not being Cat IIIb does not justify the cost of equipment and training/currency.

[Rumet]

There was a story here on PPRUNE some years ago about a CAT IIIc landing somewhere near Palma de Mallorca (of all places, for a fog landing!) but where the plane had had to wait several hours thereafter to be able to vacate the runway... don't remember any more details , maybe someone else will.

[Nick Figaretto]

I thought AMS Schipol was the only airport in the world with CAT IIIc facilities. Thus I would imagine at least KLM would be CAT IIIc certified.

Don't know though.

Nick.

[wysiwyg]

twisted, are you trying to say that in full on 3C conditions (i.e. zero/zero, no viewable centerline and thus taxiway lights) you are going to steer a wide track undercarriage down a narrow taxiway, through an apron and onto stand (remember that you won't be able to see the stand's guidance system) purely by having a LHR controller going "left a bit, stop, now right a bit"!

wizzy

[compressor stall]

surley a DGPS taxi system along the taxiways would not be too $$ to develop?

Would this be accurate enough?

[wysiwyg]

Don't call me Shirley!!! :D
If DGPS were to provide the answer and be cheap enough, either -
a) it would be done already, or
b) you're about to become very rich (if you get in there quick)!

Still not sure about the degree of accuracy on narrow taxiways though.

[GlueBall]

ATL Rwy 9R has CAT-IIIB with RVR of 300 Feet.
CAT-IIIC is N/A. :cool:

[Narada]

DGPS based systems are in work. Very few airports are surveyed to the accuracy required to 'blind taxi' - but work is in progress to survey the busy airports.

Initial requirements for such systems are being developed and refined - but the 'standards' don't exist yet. The guidance systems using the precise maps are in preliminary design and evaluation states as well.

Not "too many $$" is relative :D

It all takes time and money and is driven by a demonstrated economic case.

--
Need a spell checker!

[ 06 October 2001: Message edited by: Narada ]

[twistedenginestarter]

You could have a wagon come out and say "Follow Me". Oh sorry, apparently somebody's thought of that already.

You can negotiate any fog providing there is bright enough lighting around. For most fog conditions getting to the stand is not an insurmountable problem.

I think the reason we don't see Cat3c is cost effectiveness and the fact that some airlines have trouble landing in Cat 2.

[wysiwyg]

We seem to be forgetting that that the requirement for 3C is the ability to land with absolutely no visibility whatsoever. Therefore you can assume that the same lack of visibility will exist between the runway and the stand, i.e. a follow me truck can park itself where it likes but you ain't gonna see it. With regards to the idea of throwing a bit more light on the situation, well that usually just makes the situation worse, e.g. on a foggy road would you drive with your headlights on main or dipped beam?

Compressor stall - if DGPS can successfully solve this problem I will be one of the first to sing it's praises, especially if it increases my chaces of getting in and home to bed rather than off to the back of beyond to pick up fuel and wait for the fog to rise.

regards
wizzy

[RATBOY]

would the infra-red imaging sensors with picture to HUD or heads down display do this without the need from lots of infrastructure?

[Douglas Spragg]

Ratboy, yes work is ongoing re fitting this function in the Tower on a HUD. The other possibility being tried at present is the GHz radar for providing a view from the cockpit. Re accidents, it may be possible in the future to provide an airport database where the relative x,y,z position of the interrogating pilot, controller or vehicle driver would enable the reception of a relative accurate picture of the field AND all other traffic.

[twistedenginestarter]

wysu

You're getting a bit mixed up here. You can't see well in fog using your own lights -true- but that's using the lights to illuminate your surroundings rather than be the surroundings. You are no longer interested in the runway just the lights of the truck. Don't tell me you haven't hitched a tow from a high speed car that overtakes you on a foggy day.

So how does the truck get around? You have to remember that what you can safely use on an airliner doing 160 mph or along the side of a runway is entirely different to the options you have on a truck on speed-restricted taxiways. Also as you have noticed how much easier it is to drive in a city or along the illuminated sections of roads, similarly your problems fall away as you apprach the terminal complex.

I still think it's statistical - doesn't happen often enough to justify the investment.

[CaptainSquelch]

Since you will not be entirely alone and the tow driver may not not have magical eyes you will also need ground radar, And it needs to be working!!! :( :(

Sq (Still mad at what happened in LIN)

[wysiwyg]

Remember that in any subsequent runway vacation, taxi in and parking we cannot guarantee there will be any visual cues whether lit or not.

regards
wizzy

[BMM389EC]

Just out of interest, what equipment is needed in the aircraft and on the ground to go further than Cat3A and do Cat3B and C?