why is there no CAT III plates?

[genius747]

Hey,

I was thumbing through my jeppy - TUK04, Heathrow, Manchester, Liverpool etc etc.. and no CAT III approach plates, just CAT I & II. ~Very confused?

Help please!

Thanks gang

G74

[TolTol]

Same as CATII plates except RA = 50ft, and min RVR = 200m. Just make sure the runway is CATIII approved first.

[genius747]

I still don't understand why, major international airports such as EGLL would not publish, and jeppesen print a CAT III plate!!.... confusion must come from this. Shooting a CAT III B Approach off a CAT II Plate! I don't know..........

[Tree]

Pages 11-1A, 11-2A, 11-3A, 11-4A are all CATII/III.
You may print them yourself from the Jepp Website.

[chevvron]

Genius 747: EGLL do not publish their own plates; they're published by the UK CAA then copied by private companies Jeppesen, who are un-regulated, thus they can print what they like.
Correction; for un-regulated read self-regulated.

[sarah737]

Hey,
I was thumbing through my jeppy - TUK04, Heathrow, Manchester, Liverpool etc etc.. and no CAT III approach plates, just CAT I & II. ~Very confused?
Help please!
Thanks gang
G74

Why would you need CAT III plates??
Unlike in CAT I and II the DH and RVR in CATIII are only aircraft related and the same in the whole world. At DH you will always be over the runway. The only thing you have to know is if the runway is CATIII or not.

[alatnariver]

... and if you like Jeppesen would design and print a taylord copy of a CAT II and CAT III approach for your airline, or your self if you like to spend the money involved in taylored charts :} .

Most companies I used to work for, used only the standard set issued by Jeppesen and we had to use a list where for each airport and each runway the applicable minima and req'd. RVR values was published. Was easy to use and not a big issue :rolleyes: . For "the rest" of the approach the CAT II chart is sufficient, as except for the minima box there would be not much of a change.

[CoolHandleLuke]

My company uses Jeppesen charts.

We have tailored Jeppesen charts for CAT II/III plates with our company name printed on the header. Slightly easier to use than what alatnariver describes but probably a lot more expensive!!

[RYR-738-JOCKEY]

Why on earth shall we have to search for a small text on the airport diagram plate stating CATII/III...? It's simply rediculous. Sometimes (when diverting for instance), you don't have any time to waste.
But more importantly is that for CATIIIa, minima is not 50 feet RA...it's less than 100 down to 50 feet RA. So lets say the CATII minima is 105 RA for a specific approach, how can we just set 50 RA for a CATIIIa approach using the same plate?? To spell it out, how can it be that if the JAR-OPS CATII system minima can not be applied for an approach, why shall we automatically apply the system minima for a CATIIIa approach?
For that very reason it would have been sooooooo much easier with the damn plate in our hands.

[Permafrost_ATPL]

why shall we automatically apply the system minima for a CATIIIa approach?

Because we don't.

Have a look at the front of the TEXT Jepp binder and you'll find the Cat II/III minima for each airport and runway. Everything else on the plate is the same. I'm a bit concerned you didn't know that (if your alias is what you do).

P

[RYR-738-JOCKEY]

"Have a look at the front of the TEXT Jepp binder and you'll find ..."

Well, we don't carry a complete Jepp binder. We assemble a tripkit containing plates for dest+alternates. But anyway, thanx for the info. I have done alot of CATIIIa's and to my understanding the 50 RA is what we use. It has indeed puzzled me for a long time but I now understand that it is because of specific RYR ops...not having the complete binder onboard.

[Permafrost_ATPL]

I'm glad there is a logical explanation ;-)

P

[Seat1APlease]

"
Well, we don't carry a complete Jepp binder. We assemble a tripkit containing plates for dest+alternates..
Sounds rather a dubious practice. What happens if you're halfway there and need to put down somewhere in a hurry with a fire or whatever? If you only have plates for destination, alternates, and a few company stations on the way then you could find yourself very limited indeed.

[J.O.]

The simple answer to the originally posted question is that Jeppesen's standard subscription service does not include CATIII charts. They must be ordered on an individual basis. The reason for this is that CATIII certification is based upon state approval, and in some cases, different operators have different CAT III RVR minima, depending on the aircraft equipment, training and experience, and the regulations of the state of registry.

[CoolHandleLuke]

The reason for this is that CATIII certification is based upon state approval, and in some cases, different operators have different CAT III RVR minima, depending on the aircraft equipment, training and experience, and the regulations of the state of registry.


Is there then a difference between airport facilities for CATII and CATIII?
I mean is the only difference between II and III aircraft equipment and training etc.?

Or is there also different criteria concerning ILS sensitive areas, ground equipment and so on?

[issi noho]

738 jock

The cat 2 minima may be 105 ra, but that would still be 100 ft above the runway, most likely a dip in terrain on approach, sometimes the cat 2 is 80 ra but you wouldn't be permitted less than system minima. There is no cat2 (for cat c or above) to MAN 6r due to the valley on approach but you can still do cat3.

IN

[RYR-738-JOCKEY]

Permafrost wrote: "I'm glad there is a logical explanation ;-)"
Yep...it's not my fault ;-)
No, but seriously the reason for my attitude is that I believe that we're not applying the correct minima in some cases. We always (at least to my understanding) use the 50 RA for CATIIIa which I believe is wrong.
As in my example of a CATII minima of 105 RA, I presume the CATIIIa would be higher than 50, perhaps 55...
I believe J.O. has the answer for my case.
(Seat1APlease: Of course we carry plates for unforeseen diversions enroute..."emergency bricks" which we in normal ops don't open. BTW did you know that seat 1a has the highest death potentional in a crash? :E )

[hoey5o]

Issi Noho,

You cannot do any form of low vis approach on to 06R at Man !

The ILS is a Cat1 installation only.

If Cat11 is not available you can bet your bottom dollar Cat111 is out as well.


If all else fails Aerad enroute supplements will tell you what the airfield is capable. (or ATC of course)

[JW411]

issi noho:

"..sometimes the Cat 2 is 80 ra but you wouldn't be permitted less than system minima."

Can you explain this to me please?

[issi noho]

1. My mistake I should have said MAN 06L

2. when the approach is surveyed/tested 100 ft above the runway threshold on the glide path is calculated and ground beneath that point in space (most likely approach lights not runway) is also surveyed if this happens to be a small mound it is quite feasible that the RA displayed when the ac is 100 ft above threshold elev may be 80 ft. Your ops manual, if your submission for cat2 approval was thorough enough, should have guidance on this to avoid pilots thinking the minima they use is rubbish.

3. By virtue of the fact most airports don't surround themselves with small hills it is more likely to have a dip in the ground surrounding a runway hence you often see CAT 2 minima of 105 or 110. This is still 100ft above runway threshold.

4 CAT 3 is very definitely above the runway at decide 50ft is therefore correct.

5. MAN 06L has minima for Cat2 for catB ac but not C/D due to erroneous RA readings at decide associated with the higher speeds and the river cutting below. CAT3 is permitted all cats

Hope this clarifies my point.
IN

[RYR-738-JOCKEY]

Issi Noho: My comment was in relation to your first post, which seemed to be..not correct. Sorry.
As for Sarah:
So, I have a problem with an SOP, namely to apply 50 RA minima for CATIIIa approaches. I am then honest enough to admit that I have a problem with that, because I thought it was wrong. This low vis stuff is a quite complex matter, and I am sure you have a couple of holes in your knowledge too. F.ex. can you continue a CATII if TDZ-lighting fails? What is required RVR for 2. and 3. segment of rwy? Distance between rwy edge lights CATIII? I could go on and on...you will eventually get some of these wrong..Got it?

[FullWings]

I've always wondered what the real differences were and indeed what the point was of many seemingly identical approach plates for the same runway. :confused: Granted, the minima are different but many operators publish these seperately and they are subject to revision due NOTAMs, unserviceabilities, etc. anyway.

What is going to help you fly a better approach when using a Cat III chart instead of just one with the ILS on it? (Of whatever category) Am I missing something? A LVP taxi chart with the appropriate holding points is useful but that's on another page...

[ICT_SLB]

Is there then a difference between airport facilities for CATII and CATIII?
I mean is the only difference between II and III aircraft equipment and training etc.?
Or is there also different criteria concerning ILS sensitive areas, ground equipment and so on?

Luke,
AFAIK there are differences between CAT II & III ILS as well. CAT III requires near field monitoring of the ILS plus back-up Transmitters & generators. Beleive the lighting & hold points etc are the same - you need to check the ICAO Aerodrome requirements for the details. As mentioned elsewhere, the operator only gets certified to CAT IIIa for certain approaches which is a synthesis of aircraft & ground equipment, crew training & experience etc etc. It is quite possible to have an aircraft fully equipped for CAT III (or CAT II for that matter) but not be able to use it to those minima.

Surprizingly ILS beam accuracy is the least of your concerns, I took part in an evaluation for the JAA (as a back-seater) that looked at doing HGS CAT IIIa approaches for training on CAT I beams & there wasn't any difference - the box rejected the same inaccurate flying as it would have on a CAT III beam.

[crjlover]

I have an additional question about this topic.
An airport near our homebase has a CAT III ILS. A permanet notam report that the minumun RVR for app. are 100mt (so CAT IIIB). This notam is vaild untill the AIP will be changed. When the AIP will change how can a crew (let say from Livingston that car operate up 75m) know the minumun RVR for that app.??

p.s. I'm just a flight dispatcher.

[False Capture]

Issi noho,

You're fairly close to the truth. The reason you can't do a Cat2 approach followed by a manual landing is due to the size and the position of the valley on the approach to 06L at MAN.

As we all know, when an aircraft descends on the ILS the corrections required (in order for the aircraft to stay on the glide-slope) are also reduced. The Flight Guidance System (FGS) is programmed to take this into account. The input for the increased sensitivity of the ILS is from the Radio Altimeter.

Unfortunately for 06L, the valley occurs at a very inconvenient place, ie. when the aircraft is 100feet above the touchdown point - which would be the normal Cat2 DH. There's a chance the FGS could be making a large correction at this stage as the input from the Rad Alt leads the system to believe that it is higher than it actually is. At the Cat2 DH the aircraft should be stable. The concern is that when the autopilot is disconnected, the aircraft could be chasing the glideslope which could lead to a destabilised approach as the aircraft subsequently deviates from the required profile.

On the Cat3 approach for 06L, the valley isn't an issue as the FGS will continue flying the flying down to the touchdown point.

To summarise then. A Cat2 approach followed by a manual landing can't be done on 06L due to the fact that the pilot could be taking control at a stage when the aircraft could be slightly destabilised.

[J.O.]

False Capture:

I am not doubting your information, but here in Toronto, we fly CAT II approaches to an autoland on RWY 06L with a DH that is 100 ft above the threshold height. As there is a valley short of the threshold (where two large aircraft have ended up over the years), the actual DH used in the FMS is 108 ft. The valley is actually deeper than that (probably 30 ft below threshold height), but is rising back up at the DH point. Is the valley at MAN deeper than that at the DH point?

Jeff

[CNTDSCT]

Cat 2 plates used as CAT 3,a,b,c if airport runway used is approved and in force at time of approach,and if crew and aircraft are qualified.
Ie : Cat 2 shows 105RA,and you and your shiny aircraft are approved cat3a, 50 RA is set and 200RVR required.
Notams will tell you for preflight brief whether a cat3 is allowed.

If your a/c doesnt autoland on the centerline,always nice to advise ground about it and confirm it was your machine which :mad: up rather than their system..:E

Safe Flights,

[fastidious bob]

737 jockey

“As in my example of a CATII minima of 105 RA, I presume the CATIIIa would be higher than 50, perhaps 55...”

On a CAT2 approach the minima may be different because of the terrain on the approach, for CAT3a the minima is always going to be 50 RA because you will always be over the runway, therefore if this minima is set in stone, why produce a meaningless CAT3 plate.

[WaterMeths]

Fullwings said:

What is going to help you fly a better approach when using a Cat III chart instead of just one with the ILS on it? (Of whatever category) Am I missing something? A LVP taxi chart with the appropriate holding points is useful but that's on another page...

Hiya Fullwings....

One good reason for the extra plates (which has not been touched on yet in this thread) is the fact that lower minima might result in performance issues on the go-around to clear all obstacles, esp single engine. The go-around track might be totally different in Cat 2/3 cases to satisfy this requirement.

Cheers

WM

[mcdhu]

WaterMeths is onto it!

For a normal approach with a DH down to 200', the approach climb gradient required is 2.1% for a twin and 2.7% for a quad - JAR 25.121 Subpart B/FAR25.121 Subpart B refer.

However, for instrument approaches with a DH below 200', a OEI gradient of 2.5% is mandated. JAR 1.510 Subpart B and AWO 236 refer.

Thus, a different MAP may be required for Cat 2 and better so we use the cat 2 plate to brief from.

Cheers,
mcdhu

[FlightDetent]

Or is there also different criteria concerning ILS sensitive areas, ground equipment and so on? Definitely yes! Also, the reaction time of stadnby electrical supply makes a lot of difference.

fd (the un-real)

[FlightDetent]

Thus, a different MAP may be required for Cat 2 and better so we use the cat 2 plate to brief from. All correct from aircraft certification point but:

PANS OPS (ICAO Doc 8168) Vol I:

3.6.1.7 Normally procedures are based on a nominal missed approach climb gradient of 2.5 per cent. A gradient of 2 per cent may be used in the procedure construction if the necessary survey and safeguarding can be provided; with the approval of appropriate authority, gradients of 3,4
or 5 per cent may be used for aircraft whose climb performance permits an operational advantage to be thus obtained. When other than a 2.5 per cent gradient is used, this will be indicated on the instrument approach chart and, in addition to the OCA/H for the specific gradient used, the OCA/H applicable to the nominal gradient will also be shown.

Hence all CAT I missed APCH gradients are 2,5 per cent unless stated otherwise. So no different charts for this reason, correct?

[ComJam]

Guys, neither i nor the aircraft I fly are cleared for Cat III ILS's approaches in poor weather. I do however calibrate them.

There is really not a lot of difference between a CAT I ILS and a CAT III in terms of equipment or how it works. The Localiser for a CAT III will generally have more elements, making it more accurate, the Glideslope antenna will be of a more accurate type and, crucially, they will calibrated to a much more accurate standard and will have a much higher level of protection on the ground. Also, it's not always possible to install a CAT 2/3 depending on surrounding terrain and a huge number of physical airfield issues.

My understanding of the difference between a CAT II approach and a CAT III is simply the inputs that are used to determine your minima. On a CAT II you will use a Radar Altimeter input (75 feet or whatever) as the minima, on an a CAT III it may be 50' (which WILL be your Threshold Crossing Height) or it may be RVR related or both. The Bollin valley at MAN causes the RA to over-read close in to the Runway therefore denying a CAT II approach. A CAT III is available because it doesn't utilise the RA, the ILS Localiser is flight checked down the length of the runway to provide rollout guidance, with the GS being checked to the 50' TCH position.

As for separate CAT III plates, unless the go-around is different for performance reasons, there is really no need for a separate plate as the ILS procedure should be the same regardless of whether you are flying a CAT I or CAT III, all the plate really needs is the Minima to use for each type of available approach......feel free to flame me if i'm wrong :)

Cheers

[stator vane]

that's how they find out whether or not you have received the "Special High Intensity Training"!!!

if they made CAT 3 charts, everyone would be flying CAT 3 approaches willy nilly.

this way, they make sure only the "initiated" make it in----

[Pugilistic Animus]

Stator vane, here in the US they'll publish them in the TERPs--- but I've never thought of going willy nilly on a ILS cat 3 with a Mooney/ or C182:}


Special AIRCRAFT and aircrew required!


http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/00610I4RC3.PDF

http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/00610I22LC3.PDF

http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/06039I17CC3.PDF

http://www.myairplane.com/databases/approach/pdfs/06039I17LC3.PDF

[mcdhu]

Mmmmmm......thanks FD, you've just exposed a misunderstanding I have been harbouring for years!! I'll have to give this further thought - as to why we brief from the Cat 2 plate when we use mins from inserts in our Jepp Txt Manual.

Cheers,
mcdhu

[Denti]

We used to have tailored jepp airport booklets which in the end had the cat 3 minima as well. However earlier we just had the information in our performance manual.

Nowadays we use EAG charts (tailored as well i guess since they have the name of the airline group in the header) and lo and behold they have the cat 3 information on them as well, both for 3a and 3b.

[stator vane]

i thought it was obvious that i meant it as a joke!!!

[Pugilistic Animus]

Stator Vane: sorry, I'm easily fooled :O

but honestly one never knows these days:E

[OSCAR YANKEE]

Flying for a large somewhat orange UK operator I have long wondered why the "local" policy was to check the documentation to see whether a given rwy was approved for Cat IIIb and then use the Cat I plate to execute the approach.
One of the prerequisites for using any plate is that it only "valid" or in other words safe if you stay within the "boundaries" defined on the plate. A cat I ILS plate by definition only provides obstacle clearance if you stay inside the limits. Ie. if the minima is 200ft, the missed app. proc. only provides obstacle clearance if you initiate your missed app. at DA and don't sink through more than..... is it 30 ft ??
My point is, if you go down to ie. 50 DH and then carry out a go-around you have effectively busted the foundation of the plate, and as I understand you are not guaranteed obstacle clearance.
Now I know this is a bit longhaired, but as I understand it the largest operator in Scandinavia has a proc.for this "G/A blw. published minima" and they use and brief the engine out proc. for that scenario.

OY

Ps: We just very recently got Airline tailored plates from jepp, so it is not really an issue anymore, still I wonder :confused:

[Fork Handles]

Its the operators responsibility to establish the suitability of cat 3 runways and publish then in a Part a appendix or such.
Your minima can be operator specific within the availble categories of lvp.
Your sops will be also .ie some land off cat2 some autoland cat 2 or three regardless.
Its got **** all to do with jepp, aerad or any third party provider of info.
The authorities publish the details of facilitlies , the operators get approval to use thmbased on the above.

Its all in lesson 101 lvp