Perhaps I could attempt to help clarify few country-specific issues.
"Approach ban" is a descriptive term for a UK specific procedure, which is definitely not applicable in Polish sovereign airspace and I pretty much doubt that Cypriot operator would be affected either. Hence it is quite possible for even the smartest of folk to never have heard of it, until they are trained for UK ops.
This UK specific procedure enables ATC to (verbally) prohibit aircraft from continuing approach if met conditions are below some sort of "absolute minimum". There even exist a RT phrase that shall be cited to the commander of offending A/C.
The EU-OPS (by today's status a pan European aviation law) has a similar provision that targets shooting an approach below MNM. EU-OPS is uniformly applicable to all operators from EASA states - Cyprus included.
OPS 1.405 Commencement and continuation of approach
(a) The commander or the pilot to whom conduct of the flight has been delegated may commence an instrument approach regardless of the reported RVR/visibility but the approach shall not be continued beyond the outer marker, or equivalent position, if the reported RVR/visibility is less than the applicable minima.
(b) /.......removed for simplicity...../
(c) If, after passing the outer marker or equivalent position in accordance with (a) above, the reported RVR/visibility falls below the applicable minimum, the approach may be continued to DA/H or MDA/H.
(d) /.......removed for simplicity...../
(e) The approach may be continued below DA/H or MDA/H and the landing may be completed provided that the required visual reference is established at the DA/H or MDA/H and is maintained.
(f) The touch-down zone RVR is always controlling. /.......removed for simplicity...../
Sure it seems that among others the investigator will need to pull these drawers out:
- what was the reported RVR over OM/eq. position, i.e. was the crew legal to continue to DH?
- was the required visual reference achieved at and maintained below DH, i.e. was the crew legal not to go around?
I understand that you'll had been saying this for few posts upwards already, just wanted to make sure you don’t rip yer head off over different lingo while in agreement otherwise. Of course, I will be most happy and stand by to be educated further. Point one: I recall the definitions of "required visual reference" for CAT II, CAT IIIa, and CAT IIIb with DH. Could you help me pull out the official specs of required visual reference for CAT I?
Yours,
FD (the un-real)