Approach and minimums questions (EUR JAR Regulations)

[PitotTube]

Scenario I

You are flying a ILS CAT I (Min RVR550) with a DA of 200ft(AGL). You get the weather when you are on final (before OM) and they say RVR3000m and OVC001. Are you allowed to continue even though OVC001 is below 200ft DA?

Scenario II

You are flying a NON PRECISION APPROACH with a MDA of 600ft(AGL). RVR required is 1400m. You get the weather when turning final and they say RVR2000m OVC004. Are you allowed to continue the approach and try for a landing?

Thanks, pt

[Bealzebub]

You are flying a ILS CAT I (Min RVR550) with a DA of 200ft(AGL). You get the weather when you are on final (before OM) and they say RVR3000m and OVC001. Are you allowed to continue even though OVC001 is below 200ft DA?

Yes.


You are flying a NON PRECISION APPROACH with a MDA of 600ft(AGL). RVR required is 1400m. You get the weather when turning final and they say RVR2000m OVC004. Are you allowed to continue the approach and try for a landing?


Yes.

[Ray D'Avecta]

Scenario I

You are flying a ILS CAT I (Min RVR550) with a DA of 200ft(AGL). You get the weather when you are on final (before OM) and they say RVR3000m and OVC001. Are you allowed to continue even though OVC001 is below 200ft DA?


Yes. Strictly speaking, the only relevant factor for an ILS approach is the RVR. In your scenario, the RVR is well above limits, so you can proceed for a so called "look and see". Most companies though recommend that you do not commence an approach if "conditions make a go-around likely".....so, its your call, Captain! :}

Scenario II

You are flying a NON PRECISION APPROACH with a MDA of 600ft(AGL). RVR required is 1400m. You get the weather when turning final and they say RVR2000m OVC004. Are you allowed to continue the approach and try for a landing?


No. For non-precision approaches, both the RVR and the cloudbase are required.

[chevvron]

As a Cat 1 approach requires minimum 720m of HIAL/MIAL, these should theoretically 'show through' the low cloud to give you required visual reference.

[Bealzebub]

No. For non-precision approaches, both the RVR and the cloudbase are required.

Only as planning minima, not for the determination of an approach ban, where only RVR / visibility is the governing factor.

[flufdriver]

To the best of my (limited) knowledge; I agree with Bealzebub!

However, that is only one criteria of several, that you should consider

fluf

[PitotTube]

Ok thanks guys.

But the question remains.

Is scenario #2 (non precision approach) legal or not to continue fly? Does anyone have a link to where the answer is?

[Bealzebub]

If you have just "turned on to the final approach", and have aquired this weather report prior to passing the Outer marker / equivalent position, or 1000ft above the aerodrome. The reported RVR is above the applicable minima, therefore you can continue the approach to the relevant MDA/H. As others have said that is only one criteria that you should consider, and of course it is quite likely that given the cloudbase, your approach will conclude with a go around. Nevertheless an approach ban would not be deemed to exist given the criteria alone.




JAR OPS 1 Subpart D 1.405
Commencement and
continuation of approach

(a) The commander or the pilot to whom
conduct of the flight has been delegated may
commence an instrument approach regardless of the
reported RVR/Visibility but the approach shall not
be continued beyond the outer marker, or equivalent
position, if the reported RVR/visibility is less than
the applicable minima. (See IEM OPS 1.405(a).)

(b) Where RVR is not available, RVR values
may be derived by converting the reported visibility
in accordance with Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 1.430,
sub-paragraph (h).

(c) If, after passing the outer marker or
equivalent position in accordance with (a) above, the
reported RVR/visibility falls below the applicable
minimum, the approach may be continued to DA/H
or MDA/H.

(d) Where no outer marker or equivalent
position exists, the commander or the pilot to whom
conduct of the flight has been delegated shall make
the decision to continue or abandon the approach
before descending below 1 000 ft above the
aerodrome on the final approach segment. If the
MDA/H is at or above 1 000 ft above the
aerodrome, the operator shall establish a height,
for each approach procedure, below which the
approach shall not be continued if the
RVR/visibility is less than the applicable minima.

(e) The approach may be continued below
DA/H or MDA/H and the landing may be completed
provided that the required visual reference is
established at the DA/H or MDA/H and is
maintained.

[roljoe]

Hi,

for the non-precision, yes as long as you maintain the mda up to your map..or better a vdp (visual descent point) ...vdp which is usually defined with a 5% slope to the threshold...

at that point if nothing in sight>>go-around..

regards

[galaxy flyer]

Does anyone know if JAR OPS 1 applies to non-commercial operators, such as corporate? I cannot find a JAR for non-commercial, but do not know what rules would apply if not JAR-OPS 1.

GF

[100m down/10,000m up]

Scenario I: YES.
Scenario II: YES.

Cloud base, be it a ceiling or not, can never stop you from starting either an ILS or non ILS approach. In planning stages though, you must have a legal ceiling for the airports with NPAs (or circling), but not for ILS.

I hope it doesn't sound confusing.

[Ethiopia]

Care to elaborate a bit on how do you calculate the VDP?

[Fullblast]

Care to elaborate a bit on how do you calculate the VDP

It depends upon the glide, for a 3° one you have the right vertical speed with GS x 5.

FB

[flufdriver]

Ethiopia;
to explain VDP in a different way:

Calculate at what distance from the touchdown point you have to be able to see the runway in order to make a safe landing (stabilized approach)

So, lets say you make a VOR approach, the VOR is the missed approach point (MAP) and is located half a mile from the Treshold of your landing runway. As you can see, if you arrive at your MDA and your MAP at the same time, you won't be able to land.

Therefore you calculate how far out (from the Treshold) you have to be down to your MDA if you want to have a chance of landing out of the approach.

for me that would go somehow like this: MDA 500 feet above field elevation, in a stabilised approach I'd be descending about 300 feet per mile, (approx. 800 ft min @ 150kts = 2.5 miles per minute or about 300 feet per mile) I would calculate my VDP to be about 2 miles from touchdown, in this case about 1.5 DME, it works and you don't even need a calculator or a computer for this.

fluf