In EASA land..
CAT2 lowest DH is
100ft and lowest RVR is
350m. However, according to EASA Ops,
"an RVR of 300 may be used for a category D aircraft conducting an auto-land".
To me that sounds like
two conditions that need to be met if an RVR of 300m exists at the time of approach. You must be a category D (that's actually not that many aircraft!)
AND on the day, be capable of an auto-land.
However, my last 2 interviewers were perplexed by this relatively complex answer and were simply expecting to hear 100ft/300m as the answer to the question "what is the lowest minima for a CAT2 approach. Interestingly, one airline had a mixed fleet of mixed ages, the other 100% A320 CEOs. They should be exposed to this complication.
It's left me questioning myself, but I'm gonna go out on a limb and say I'm correct and that most pilots are unaware of the qualifying criteria behind the 300m RVR. What's your experience?
Second question, I've seen people use ranges instead of the "less than" language mentioned in EASA OPS like the example below. Is that valid? If no, then trainers everywhere need to address this incorrect thinking. If yes, the language used by EASA is pathetically bad.
