Moggiee, please let's put the handbags away. It's completely inappropriate and unseemly in the present circumstances.
I never said you were completely wrong, in fact I agree with what you said in your last post. However, there will always be times when what you have pointed out just will not apply due to the conditions on the day. (See my last post #215 on page 11 of this thread. Hypothetically speaking, do you believe that you would be able to complete a CAT I approach with a DH of 200' in daylight in the conditions described. I don't believe any AGL would penetrate the layer of cloud described sufficiently to make descent below 200' possible! Not the same conditions as Cork yesterday morning I know, but it is only a question).
It seems there are some differences in interpretation between our two sides of the fence - maybe there should be more collaborative training than we have had available to us for the last number of years.
All I wanted to point out is that there are times when it would appear that conditions seem suitable to attempt an approach, but turn out not to be, and then there are other times when the opposite is the case. I am open to correction of course, being more accustomed to keeping you guys apart than actually doing the driving. I am speaking from long hard-earned experience however.
I also wanted to make the point that a lot of people appear to be approaching the
(alleged) issues at play here, incorrectly, from a UK legislative perspective.
There is no Absolute Minima legislation in RoI for CAT I approaches, therefore there is no such thing as an Approach Ban in poor conditions. The met info is simply passed to the pilot and if he elects to make an approach then no attempt is made to dissuade him from that course of action. He is cleared for the approach and given as much info as possible to assist in the completion of that approach. He is still cleared to land at 4 miles (or more). If he reaches DH and can't complete, then GA, it's that simple.
Consequently, speculation (by others) about illegal descent below 1000' in below minima conditions with an approach ban in effect is absolutely ridiculous.
Purely pointing out a difference (from experience) from UK procedures.
To summarise: My position is that speculation about what prevailed at the time of the accident is completely pointless - no completely accurate info will be available until the final report is published.
Therefore let's just wait for the report, and stop making ourselves look like bickering idiots. We are professionals after all
