Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

CAT3 capability - specific configuration

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

CAT3 capability - specific configuration

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 22nd July 2008 | 22:29
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
From: SW France
CAT3 capability - specific configuration

Hello,

I try to list the different aircrafts certified for CAT3 approach in a specific configuration: with autoland but without autothrottle.

Do you know aircrafts of this specific type?

Thank you for your help,

Mic
MicflyZ is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2008 | 01:26
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
From: slightly left of you
the 737 classic i fly allows you to continue an autoland if the authrottle were to fail on the approach, not too sure on what the rules are on dispatching with an authrottle u/s to an airfield where cat III likely. will have to check my ops manual.
cortilla is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2008 | 02:21
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 3
From: Arizona USA
CATIII allowed in the L-1011, without autothrottle, however DLC must be operative.
411A is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2008 | 02:59
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
From: orbital
B744.

CAT 3B not allowed without autothrottle. (0 ft DH)

CAT 3A OK. (50ft DH)
Re-entry is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2008 | 07:14
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
From: Choroni, sometimes
Not on A300.

You need at least 1 ATS Channel for CAT III A and B.
hetfield is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2008 | 07:27
  #6 (permalink)  
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 6,729
Likes: 104
From: The Winchester
Re-entry

FWIW, and for the sake of completeness, your 744 restriction must be specific to your operator and not a Boeing restriction - we ( major 744 operator) are allowed to do do CAT III No DH without Autothrottle.
wiggy is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2008 | 07:44
  #7 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,575
Likes: 4
From: UK
not too sure on what the rules are on dispatching with an authrottle u/s to an airfield where cat III likely. will have to check my ops manual.
- all 737 types OK for dispatch in my experience.
BOAC is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2008 | 16:48
  #8 (permalink)  
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,132
Likes: 3
From: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Wiggy,

I agree [I suspect we operate for he same UK carrier], autothrust not required for Cat 3B operations, the manual just says 'the thrust levers should be controlled manually to maintain approach speed. At approx 25R, gradually reduce power to reach idle on touchdown.'

Not so on the A320 family from recollection, but no big deal on the QOTS!
TopBunk is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2008 | 18:00
  #9 (permalink)  

Dog Tired
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,686
Likes: 2
From: uk
A320 no A/thrust = Cat 2.

(throttles are fitted to cars).
fantom is offline  
Reply
Old 23rd July 2008 | 22:50
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,772
Likes: 348
From: UK
I would expect that auto throttle (or not) to be aircraft type dependent. Manual thrust can destabilise the pitch/glidepath accuracy depending on engine location and autopilot speed control system (airspeed / alpha). In this case any dispensation would have to show that the (manual) system still met the approach accuracy requirements.
However, I note that JAR-AWO 321 (b) for operations down to 50ft DH, only requires that workload be considered.
For DHs below 50ft or no DH, then autothrottle is required, i.e. no dispensation. (JAR-AWO 321 (c) & (d))
safetypee is offline  
Reply
Old 24th July 2008 | 07:37
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
From: London
CS-AWO requirements

For DHs below 50ft or no DH, then autothrottle is required, i.e. no dispensation. (JAR-AWO 321 (c) & (d))
Yesterday 19:00
Many types in current operation will have been certificated to earlier versions of JAR AWO which required AT unless it could be shown that the required performance could be achieved without it and without excessive pilot workload. Even now the introductory paragraph still says 'The following items of equipment must be installed for certification to the decision heights specified unless it is shown that the intended level of safety is achieved with alternative equipment, or the deletion of some items:' It is presumably possible to include AT in the MEL too. Sounds like lots of wriggle room.
gonebutnotforgotten is offline  
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



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

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.