Can some A340 Pilots give some idea of the sophistication of the Autoland, which I assume must have been flying the plane in that kind of weather?
Errr..... why do you make that assumption ?!*! Autoland systems are for FOG... they have stricter wind limits than do manual landings, and are therefore singularly unsuitable for turbulent type weather. From my A340(-300) days it had quite a strict X-Wind limit (10K? 15K?).
Even ATHR, which tends to be used for most landings in modern Airbus / 777 types, often gets maxed out in turbulence, and Man THR required / advised, depending on pilot's choice / Company SOPs and how well this ATHR is performing on the day. Not flown the 777, so not sure if this applies, but A320 series certainly is.
SM
BUT what happened after this KLM\'s missed approach when airport closed down? Right! It declared a low fuel emergency!What on earth were those fellows doing there around an airport with the most awful weather on fumes?
Errr.. "fumes" and "low fuel emergency" - how do you equate those 2 ?!*! All he was probably doing was making the accepted statement equivalent to a "Pan" over here, stating he required assistance from ATC in order to land (somewhere) with more than the required reserves.
I presume you would rather he had not issued the "low fuel emergency", and just "hoped" all would work out... somewhat like the Columbian 707 at JFK some years ago...
Might I suggest you remove your somewhat slanderous comment unless you can add some facts to back up your assertion he "was on fumes".