Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Cat 1.5 Approaches?

Old 22nd Jan 2016, 04:28
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cat 1.5 Approaches?

Mentioned in today's Oz: Nocookies | The Australian

(Sorry, it might be behind a paywall).

Airlines and airports are set to slash flight delays caused by foggy and rainy weather as the aviation regulator introduces new rules to allow planes to land in low-visibility conditions.
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has introduced the new rules as the use of technologies such as heads-up displays and automatic landing systems that allow aerodromes and pilots to cut through low-visibility conditions become more widespread.
From March 3, CASA will introduce two new “special” categories of landing rules that will allow aircraft to land safely in deteriorating and foggy weather conditions.
The new rules will apply to aircraft that possess advanced visual and landing technology systems typically found in larger modern jets such as Boeing’s 737s and Airbus’s A320s.
Runways with Category 2, Category 3 or SA Category 2 precision approach procedures will also be automatically eligible for the new operations.
CASA said the new rules would allow safety standards to be maintained during low visibility landings without the requirement for aerodromes to install additional runway and approach lighting normally required when landing aircraft in fog and heavy rain.
Under current regulations, *pilots are only permitted to land on Category 1 airstrips if they can see the runway from a height of no less than 200ft and a distance of no less than 800m.
If conditions are too poor to get a visual confirmation at those distances, pilots are required to abort the landing, try again or go to another airport. Pilots can also gain landing clearance for a better lit runway if airports possess them.
The new rules will introduce a halfway point between the landing requirements for Category 1 and Category 2 runways and allow pilots to land in poor weather when they can spot landing strips from a height of 150 feet and at a visible range of 450m.
The new rules will also mean airports will not have to spend the millions of dollars required to upgrade runways with new lighting systems to ensure they meet the higher visibility standards needed for landing in poor weather conditions.
Sydney airport, Melbourne airport and the nation’s top two carriers, Qantas and Virgin, welcomed the new standards, saying the rules represented best practice without compromising safety standards.
“Melbourne airport is already certified for low visibility operations for one of our runways and we look forward to implementing the new regulations on our second runway to make Melbourne airport more efficient for airlines and passengers.“ said Melbourne airport spokeswoman Anna *Gillett.
Qantas chief technical pilot Alex Passerini said the airline was delighted with the introduction of the new regulations.
“For customers, it means less chance of diversions due to bad weather and more on time arrivals,” Captain Passerini said.
“And from a business perspective, it increases the efficiency of our aircraft and ensures our schedules stay on track as it will reduce aircraft holding in the air or other delays.”
CASA has estimated the changes could lead to savings of more than $10 million a year for the aviation industry and community as fewer flights are *delayed.

Last edited by OK4Wire; 22nd Jan 2016 at 06:37. Reason: Added the text.
OK4Wire is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2016, 06:23
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yep behind a paywall. Perhaps you can cut and paste the most relevant information from the article in education & public interest under the "fair dealing" provision of Australian copyright law.

There isn't much point linking to paywall articles unless you are prepared to include the essence of the article.
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2016, 06:32
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Sydney
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
is this relevant?

Good news for flights in bad weather ·ETB Travel News Australia
no_one is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2016, 07:36
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No need to worry about copyright, there doesn't appear to be any journalistic input what so ever! Its all lifted straight out of a CASA media release:

[CASA MEDIA RELEASE] Good news for flights in bad weather

Australia’s airline passengers are set to face fewer flight delays and cancellations in the future due to poor weather.


Airports and airlines can introduce new special low visibility categories of operations that will allow aircraft to land safely in deteriorating weather conditions.


It has been estimated this could lead to savings of more than $10 million a year for the aviation industry and the community.


The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has developed the special low visibility categories of operations after consultation with the aviation industry and a review of international best practice.


These operations will take advantage of advanced technology in large passenger aircraft such as pilot head up displays and automatic landing systems.


Using this technology means safety standards can be maintained during low visibility landings without the requirement for aerodromes to install all of the additional runway and approach lighting normally required for these operations.


The aircraft technology and supporting flight procedures removes the need for a full array of airport lighting.


Aerodromes may still need to install some equipment, depending on the lighting and other equipment already in place.


While there is no requirement for airlines and airports to utilise the new special low visibility categories a number of major airports have expressed an interest in doing so. Australia’s major airlines and many foreign airlines already have aircraft fitted with suitable technology.


CASA’s Director of Aviation Safety, Mark Skidmore, said the new low visibility categories are great news for passengers and the aviation industry.


“CASA has worked with the airlines and major aerodromes to develop standards that offer real benefits while maintaining the appropriate safety standards for flights in low visibility,” Mr Skidmore said.


“This is a win for the travelling public who face fewer delays, a win for the airlines who can use technology already in their aircraft and a win for the airports who face lower costs when introducing low visibility operations.
“Passengers can be confident there will be no reduction in safety as a result of the changes.”
The key phrases to me are:

These operations will take advantage of advanced technology in large passenger aircraft such as pilot head up displays and automatic landing systems
The aircraft technology and supporting flight procedures removes the need for a full array of airport lighting.



Aerodromes may still need to install some equipment, depending on the lighting and other equipment already in place.
Does this looks and smell like a low cost (to aerodrome operators) CAT II/III using HUD? Now, I wonder who has that installed?
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2016, 08:01
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gate_15L
Age: 50
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Gulfstream have had approvals allowing pilots using their enhanced flight vision system under FAA regs to descend to 100 ft above Touchdown Zone Elevation, below DA / MDA regardless whether it was CAT 1 or 2.

The vision system is considered such a navigational advantage that the Federal Aviation Administration in a Part 91 rule change allows an EVS-trained pilot to descend to 100 feet/30 meters―lower than typical decision height―until a visual reference is established. That’s an advantage that reduces go arounds, putting aircraft and passengers on the ground faster and reducing the amount of fuel expended.

Gulfstream Aerospace - Product Support - Product Enhancements - Enhanced Vision System

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/...C%2090-106.pdf
Having seen the system in action, it transmits a infrared image from the nose mounted camera and projects it on to the captains HUD..

Only took airlines about 15 years to catch up... Yeah yeah yeah, beancounters, lawyers, liability. You still can't deny that its still pretty cool...
I do wonder though which Boeings/Airbus aircraft have infrared installed? Would be handy at night picking your way through those dry tops in the Pacific at night....

Last edited by Gate_15L; 22nd Jan 2016 at 08:07. Reason: damn you autocorrect...
Gate_15L is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2016, 11:49
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 3,067
Received 138 Likes on 63 Posts
Well good news if you are flying QF mainline. Don't think there will be to many high fives in any other airline office.

QF mainline have just been provided a enormous competitive advantage by CASA.

What's the retrofit cost of a HUD system?
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2016, 15:40
  #7 (permalink)  
swh

Eidolon
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Some hole
Posts: 2,171
Received 24 Likes on 13 Posts
One of the new issues with EVS is that new airport lighting is LED technology, that does not generate the heat of current lights. EVS is far less effective in such cases, and approach charts don't list the lighting technology employed at airports, they list the configuration.
swh is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2016, 15:57
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Australia, welcome to the 1960's - by 2100 you may have progressed to the 1990's!
TopBunk is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2016, 17:18
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Boldly going where no split infinitive has gone before..
Posts: 4,783
Received 44 Likes on 20 Posts
Yep- LTS (lower then standard) minima- been a feature of ILS approaches in the rest of the world for decades.

For all the hype, they allow a 100-150m reduction in allowable RVR for landing off of a CatI approach.

How many hours a year will that mean landing rather than further holding or diverting?

Not none-but not many either.
Wizofoz is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2016, 19:40
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes on 11 Posts
It's the first step in the incremental lowering of rvr for the ultimate goal of Cat III using a CatI ILS using the HUD in AIII mode. It's 6 times more sensitive than a standard ILS with flare guidance and rollout being hand flown using manual thrust to CAT III minima. Way ahead of any Airbus!
Troo believer is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2016, 21:14
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 605
Received 13 Likes on 3 Posts
Bugger that! Who wants to hand fly an approach to cat 3 minimums! Not this little black duck....

The aeroplane can do a much better job than me under those circumstances and isn't dependent upon where I have put the seat, whether I am having a coffee induced tremor or it is the end of a long red eye and I am a bit behind the eight ball....

If you did those sort of approaches day after day maybe, but here you would do a cat 3 approach a couple of times a year, if that, so I don't think the adding of yet another recency component to the already busy sims is going to improve people's skill set..

I am sure I could if I needed to but doesn't mean I want to..
Snakecharma is online now  
Old 22nd Jan 2016, 23:35
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Posts: 2,461
Received 290 Likes on 112 Posts
Awesome, so they've just approved a Qantas approach. Shame about any other operator in this country.

Qantas, Airservices and CASA, all one happy family.

If I had a dollar for every time that ATC favoured Qantas over others this week, I would have earnt more than I did from my flight pay!

morno
morno is online now  
Old 22nd Jan 2016, 23:40
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Troo Believer picked up the subtlety in my "Now, I wonder who has that installed?" comment.It wasn't ever about infra-red Enhanced Vision equipment.
The trick of the this media release is to be sufficiently vague & ambiguous with a dash of misdirection (large passenger aircraft), so as not appearing to favour any one operator. The practical reality however is that only one operator is favoured by these changes. I doubt we will see many international operators taking advantage of the changes.

That said, the operator in question has obviously spent a considerable sum to equip aircraft & train crew. My criticism is of CASA's media release.
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2016, 23:44
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes on 11 Posts
Nothing to do with Qantas favouritism. Who else operates Boeing equipment with HUD? Not Virgin, not Jetstar A320 but only the QF 737 and JQ 787. Buy the HUD, train the crew and apply to CASA for approval. See how long that will take?
Troo believer is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2016, 23:57
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 72
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Aren't people being a bit parochial with their comments here? Although QANTAS and Virgin are mentioned in the article, there are plenty of international airlines operating into Cat 1 airports which will benefit from the change.
fujii is offline  
Old 23rd Jan 2016, 00:07
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Elsewhere
Posts: 608
Received 67 Likes on 27 Posts
The release is somewhat vague and refers to both HUD and autoland, and it's not clear to me that HUD is a requirement for what they're introducing. Could it be a case of either/or, so that aircraft without HUD but with autoland may be able to take advantage of the lower minima?


Sydney airport, Melbourne airport and the nation’s top two carriers, Qantas and Virgin, welcomed the new standard
I'm not sure why Virgin would welcome it if it only advantaged their main competitor.
itsnotthatbloodyhard is offline  
Old 23rd Jan 2016, 00:25
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 605
Received 13 Likes on 3 Posts
I read it the same way..hud or autoland, not both and if you think about it autoland works happily without hud - the two are not connected...
Snakecharma is online now  
Old 23rd Jan 2016, 02:02
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not at work
Posts: 1,569
Received 59 Likes on 30 Posts
Would someone get morno (and others) a box of Kleenex?

Qantas spent a sh1tload on getting HUDs fitted and associated extra training, why shouldn't they have a commercial advantage and be able to use them to their full capability?
Transition Layer is offline  
Old 23rd Jan 2016, 02:07
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by fujii
Aren't people being a bit parochial with their comments here? Although QANTAS and Virgin are mentioned in the article, there are plenty of international airlines operating into Cat 1 airports which will benefit from the change.
Yes, they will be able to potentially use the new rules, but will they? Will it be worth training to what appears to be a non-standard CAT II/III with CASA approval just in case they fly to Oz? In just the same way RNP is potentially available to overseas operators, most don't make use of them (ANZ as the exception?).

As I said, the press release is sufficiently vague & ambiguous - but it clear in one regard - it looks non-standard with regard to lighting requirements. Until more details are released it is unclear what will be involved for overseas operators.
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 23rd Jan 2016, 02:43
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 3,067
Received 138 Likes on 63 Posts
If CASA are allowing CAT I autolands with a lower minima but no HUD how is that maintaining the current standard? I would assume the safety case is here that you have a HUD which gives you added protection in the lower visibility. To just allow autolands on a CAT I ILS at 450RVR with nothing else is hardly maintaining the current safety standard. But this is CASA we are talking about so it will be interesting to see the exemption they give out.
neville_nobody is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.