About T/O Minimum

[boeing00]

Hi! All...
This is became a issue between pilots of my ailrline nowadays and I still can
not sure what is the best answer for this issue...Please help me with your openions..
Well, the T/O minimum at my base Airport is like this

RUNWAY 32R: with RCLM 3RVR required T/D:350 MID:350 R/O:350
without RCLM 500

When visibilty is reported as T/D 500 MID:100 R/O:150

Can the captain select "the without RCLM column" (the RWY is RCLM equipped), and suppose that T/O minima is satisfied? or can we apply "the adequite visible reference" on jeppesen manual.
If we takeoff applying "Adequite Vis. Ref." in jeppessen manual, is it legally O.K.? or we should not T/O with this visibility?

with best wishes...
boeing00

[discountinvestigator]

first issue: the runway is equipped with runway centreline markings. Therefore, the first set of rules apply
second issue: the runway visual range is given for the set of rules, you have quoted visibility. You have to convert visibility to runway visual range
third issue: you may require all three RVRs to be at the relevant level in case of rejected take-off.
four: your insurance company will not be impressed if you are using the Jepps rules and not the worst combination of airport and company rules.

[Clandestino]

When visibilty is reported as T/D 500 MID:100 R/O:150


It's not reported visibility, it's RVR! I doubt that any weatherman worth his salt would give visibility at his airport greater than lowest RVR on rwy in use. Taking the highest measured RVR and regarding it as visibility is not just illegal but it's also plain stupid and dangerous.

[rigpiggy]

in my company(canada) we have reduced t/o mins ops specs. <2600-1200" rvr requires edge lights/cl marking, and a few other requirements<1200-600" requires the above + cl lighting

[bleeds off]

RUNWAY 32R: with RCLM 3RVR required T/D:350 MID:350 R/O:350
without RCLM 500

When visibilty is reported as T/D 500 MID:100 R/O:150

Boeing00,

As Discountinvestigator says, since the rwy is fitted with RCLM, the first set of minimums apply. If we take it as given that you rather meant reported RVR instead of reported visibility,it would mean that at least two of the values are lower than the minimums. So you cannot go. Actually, in this case, RVR minimums are compared to reported RVR. Comparison has to be applied strictly. Had they reported a visibility, it would have been then possible for the Captain to assess himself the RVR and to decide accordingly.
But as opposed to what was stated by Discountinvestigator, visibility cannot be transformed into RVR in three cases :
1/ For take off (That is our case here)
2/ FOR CAT2 and CAT3 approaches
3/ When there is a reported RVR

All the best
Bleeds off