ILS Cat III on F2000

[leonard17F]

Hello fellow PPruners,

I would like to know if any of you have had the opportunity to fly Cat III ILS approaches on the F2000 ?

How does the aircraft, including the avionics and the HUD, handle these ?

Thanks a lot,
Leo

[McDoo]

Originally Posted by leonard17F

Hello fellow PPruners,

I would like to know if any of you have had the opportunity to fly Cat III ILS approaches on the F2000 ?

How does the aircraft, including the avionics and the HUD, handle these ?

Thanks a lot,
Leo

Does the F2TH have autoland?

[CL300]

since it is hand flown, the outcome depends of your ability to keep the bird in the nest.. very nice, only to the very minimas in the simulator though. Always a good experience. Dispatch is easier when authorized to 200 m RVR since your alternate is an ILS Cat 1....

very conformal, it is a Falcon... :-)

[t211]

Forgive my Intrusion In all the years i had been flying Commercially i have never heard of a CAT3 Approach being flown Manual, I was cleared to CAT11 and that was a manual landing. All I can say is things have changed drasticaly

[CL300]

on the Falcon family Cat3A is HUD manual .. Cat 2 is A/P, with option on HUD for monitoring while on A/P. I am not sure if we can fly CAT 2 manual head-down..
When used to CAT3 manual it is a doodle..

I think that the Embraer or the CRJ was (is) doing it as well

[Welle]

CRJ CAT IIIa

....yes indeed, the CRJ is approved for CAT IIIa approaches - as there is no autoland, the approach and landing has to be flown manual using the HUD.
(dual IRS, HUD and dual FMS had to be installed)

The systems works quite fine, never had a problem during many low vis approaches back in my airline times..

welle

[Clandestino]

CAT IIIa capable Head-up Guidance System was certified in 1977. but there was no takers for about twenty years until Bombardier and Dassault figured out it would be cheaper to give their steed CAT IIIa capability by installing it than developing autoland for F2000/CRJ/DHC-8. In my four winters on Q400 I used ıt ın anger about 50-odd times, always successfully, which was just normal around my outfıt - no one ever had problems with adjusting to manual cat III. One just sets up everything properly and when GS captures it's just matter of keeping guidance circles perfectly concentric and speed error bar as short as possible. Everything else is monitored by F/O, head down. Provided one can see something at 50ft, flare and rollout guidance help lead to stop in predictable manner. There is also takeoff guidance that enabled us to reduce minimum takeoff RVR from 125 to 75m.

Interestingly, I used to fly A320 with CAT IIIB NO DH capability, currently fly 738 with CAT IIIA and both of them are restricted to autoland only below 200DH/550RVR.

[Denti]

I believe Boeing certified a CAT IIIa capable HGS on its 737 at the beginning of the 90ies with the first airlines equipping them around 95. Apparently the HGS is still preferred over a CAT IIIb capable autoland system in the US on the 737. Apparently they test flew Jurassic 737s with HUDs since the end of the 70s which ties in with the timeline clandestino mentioned.

The restriction clandestino mentions must be imposed either by his company or local CAA, on the 737s (CAT IIIb) i flew and the A320 i still fly, manual CAT II landings are allowed without the use of a HUD. However, autoland is preferred of course.

[leonard17F]

All,

Thanks a lot for your very valuable inputs.
I understand that on F2000, Cat IIIA/B approach is MANUAL flying using the HUD, since there is NO Autoland capability.

I also understand that on the Q400 there is a similar capability for Cat IIIA/B MANUAL flying using the HUD.

Finally, may I ask if the HUD provides a Flare cue or does it follow the ILS Glide Path until touchdown ? ("Navy" landing)
And does the Auto-throttle retard at 50ft ? (Is it flown on A/T actually ? I would think so.....)

[CL300]

Flare cue appears around 20 ft, AT shall be off before, but if you forget it goes to idle at 20 ft as well :-), since DH is 50ft, should not be an issue...

commercial brochure : https://das.falconjet.com/i/cp_files/HGS%20and%20EFVS.pdf

https://www.rockwellcollins.com/~/media/Files/Unsecure/Products/Product%20Brochures/Displays/Head%20up%20displays/HGS-3500%20White-Paper.aspx

[leonard17F]

Thanks a lot CL-300.

And I understand that the HUD CAT III capability is fully certified, correct ?

[CL300]

for about 20 years ...

[EatMyShorts!]

Just to be sure: the maximum you can get is CAT IIIa, not IIIb. It is still good enough and you will hardly use it anyways. I used to fly ERJ145 and we had an HGS, too. No auto-throttle, but we were still able to fly manual CAT IIIa approaches. We did not perform many in the end, but the training took a lot of time and once a week we had to fly a simulated CAT IIIa approach to keep up certification/currency requirements.

[CL300]

since there is a DH, it is 3A.

What matter most is accessibility when you have on box 18 , RVR 200; your CTOT is on time, more or less. And your alternate is CAT1. Training and requirements are irrelevant IMHO, when customer service and on-time delivery are a concern, everything else is just excuses.

[leonard17F]

Thanks a lot CL-300 and all.

My question reg certification was because I read somewhere that the authorities expressed some concerns with the performance of the HUD (blinding phenomenons, etc...) and they may even have downgraded it or suspended it.

[FlightDetent]

Originally Posted by Clandestino

Interestingly, I used to fly A320 with CAT IIIB NO DH capability, currently fly 738 with CAT IIIA and both of them are restricted to autoland only below 200DH/550RVR.

What about CAT II manual landing with 350m RVR, is/was that an option?

Regards,
FD

[CL300]

@Leonard17F EFVS ( FLIR) yes, but HUD haven't heard about it.

[canbra]

Originally Posted by CL300

since there is a DH, it is 3A.

Hi there,

Are you sure about that? I came across SFO RWY 28 ILS CAT II/III plate the other day and noticed that both 3A and 3B had only RVR requirements, no DA/H.

P.S.: New user here. Not a pilot, but interested in that sort of discussion since I am an avionics guy who is trying to educate himself on that field.

[canbra]

Here, from the FAA on AC 120-28D Appdx 1:

A precision instrument approach and landing with a decision height lower
than 30m (100 ft), or no decision height and a runway visual range not less than 200m (700 ft).

So there you go.

[CL300]

In fact CAT3 are special authorizations, LOA or whatever ; the minima are listed in this LOA, so depending on plane, company, crews it may differ. ILS CAT3 minimas are therefore company specific hence the generic statement on the chart. This is my understanding of things.

on tha AWO on the EU side of pond it is more detailed then in the far/aim