Originally Posted by
RYR-738-JOCKEY
ATC is not taking the decision for you, which sometimes would be appropriate in my view. For instance you're doing a CATIIIa approach at night, RVR is 350 and then the touchdown zone lights fails. The controller should both know that the required RVR is then 550, and more importantly advise every aircraft of this ("..below minimums.."). I get the feeling they just leave it to us to decide, 'cause they won't get in trouble anyway...
Maybe you're being provocative but, certainly in my part of the world, this is the reverse of what ATC does. The commander, as is often pointed out when any suggestion is made to the contrary, is responsible for managing his or her aircraft and making decisions on the basis of all the relevant information. The UK has dipped its toe into getting ATC to tell pilots when they are about to make an approach below minimum - the so called absolute minima procedure - and it is hugely confusing and widely misunderstood. And it doesn't apply in CAT II/III because of the different minima that different operators have.
Originally Posted by
RYR-738-JOCKEY
ATC is there to help us out, but I have noticed that they can sometimes report wx to be at minimums just to give us a chance. Especially when it comes to wind, which is very difficult to report because it changes all the time when it's gusty and close or above limits. It's not much of a help when you get a report of max x-wind and you're not able to align in the flare.
Maybe, but can you be sure? Most of the data that is passed to pilots is recorded and it would be a foolish controller who misrepresents the data to a pilot. But if you think it's the case - and, who knows, it could be inaccurate sensing equipment - there are ways to report it. Each State across the EU now has to have a safety occurrence reporting system - use it.