Watchdog
Approach bans are JAA(EASA) pertinent to LVO's (essentially) with Transmissiometers reporting RVRs in usually the three zones.
Can’t speak for JAA(EASA) but in a large number of Asian country’s it applies to all approaches.
Who's going to report the cloud base in Charleville when I'm doing my RNAV....the refueller??
I’m not sure where you get cloud base from in your argument when talking about “Approach Ban”. RVR/Vis is the only determining factor for “Approach Bans” and we are only talking about airports that have a met observer or Transmissiometers, i.e. airports that accept RPT turboprop/jet transports. The idea of having “Approach ban” requirements out in the bush where actual WX reports aren’t available is impractical and plainly nonsense.
Isn't MEL Australia's only place with a cat II at present?
Mel RWY 16 is actually Cat IIIB to approved operators.
In reference to the thread regarding WX at OOL on the 27th Jan, an Approach Ban would only be relevant for some operators if the reported Vis on the ATIS or tower was below 4000m for VOR 14/32, 4100m RNAV 32 or 4500m RNAV 14. What the wind is doing is irrelevant to “Approach Ban”. This is an aircraft limitation issue. If outside the limits you can have a go in the hope it will reduce below the limits by the time you land, and/or hold and/or divert.