Originally Posted by
FO Cokebottle
JammedStab:
By ignoring just about every basic rule/regulation regarding the IFR, including but not limited to:
1. Flight Planning (Dispatch)
a. Alternate requirements
b. Fuel Requirements
i. holding fuel
ii. minimum fuel [including minimum divert fuel]
2. Holding and Instrument Approach to Land Procedures
a. Meteorological minima for the approach
3. Aerodrome Meteorological Minima
a. Landing Minima
b. Low visibility operations/procedures (application of such procedures)
c. Application of Aerodrome Meteorological Minima
i. Pilot responsibilities
ii. ATC assessment
In short, the PIC may have had all these cards in their hand but due to the decision making processes, for what ever reason, discarded them one-by-one until there was nil other alternative/option other than to land in such weather conditions by conducting a Low Visibility Operation (LVO) autoland onto a runway that, as aterpster has pointed out, was NOTAM'ed with a displaced threshold, which is a lesser issue than that of the runway, itself, was not to the equipment/facility standard required to conduct such a landing in LVO conditions.
Not sure I understand. I heard they held for quite a while due to poor weather. Did they hold for such a long time that they could no longer get to their alternate? Was their alternate New Delhi which has CAT III?