Jet2 4
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given the weather conditions at the time: RVRs of around 350m, those landings were probably by Cat III Autoland equipped aircraft, the ones that diverted were likely not equipped or not authorised.
Last edited by RAFAT; 31st May 2017 at 02:15.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Either the back of a sim, or wherever Crewing send me.
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Or were 737-800's that are landing performance limited and were likely too heavy to land in the fog, as extra landing distance is required over a manual landing.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAT III autolands aren't authorised at Leeds Bradford so they'll be flying to CAT I minimums
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Derby
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAT 3B is an option on the later 737NG. The modifications to the rudder servo made it possible to add the rollout feature. Yes, only two autopilots but improved monitoring with I think inputs from the standby Attitude and Heading Reference System make it workable. It's a cost option so not everyone buys it. I know it's fitted on the newer Thomson aircraft.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Either the back of a sim, or wherever Crewing send me.
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
No real need for it to be honest. In 13 and a bit years of operating the B737 with Cat3A fitted I've never needed anything other than that. Visibility so poor is so infrequent it's an additional cost for very little gain.
I have been flying the NG for about the same time and have had exactly one diversion when 3b would have got us in. Having said that, the newer NGs are significantly improved, although an autoland go-around above alert height single engine flaps 30 (if you have the authorisation) is a pretty demanding manouevre.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Either the back of a sim, or wherever Crewing send me.
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post