No FLARE during CAT3

[Boroda]

What should we do under real CAT3:

- go around
or
- AP off and manual flare

if visual contact established?

Any paper reference please

[Endeavour]

You don't say which aircraft type you are refering to, but generally speaking, your going to make contact with the runway in anycase!

[Man Flex 37.5]

Boroda

Take a look at the FCOM, i think Vol 4 Failures and associated actions below 1000ft for Cat III approach, it gives the option on no "Flare" at 30 feet to either disengage and manual landing or a go around, firstly it is quite a subtle failure often going unnoticed, secondly trying to do a manual landing from this point is quite tricky bearing in mind you only have around 3 seconds before impact.

MF

[Dani]

You only gonna make RWY contact below the infamous MAH (minimum alert height). I agree it's type specific.

Dani

[Boroda]

A320, autoflare should be at 40 feet. CAT3A minima - 50 feet.

It is known that for CAT3 autoland is mandatory. Because in comparence with CAT2 we do not need to have visual contact for manul landing, the only thing we need - we are sure over touchdown zone.

If we are sure at 50 feet, but no flare at 40, can I make manual landing?

Actually I was punished by TRE at simulator refresh for my manual landing, reason - autoland is mandatory.

[WindSheer]

If this were to happen in a boeing, couldn't you just give the yoke a tug, or are the autopilot 'motors' too powerful??

[DBate]

A couple of year ago, the scenario of NO FLARE was standard during the training sessions on the A320. The only legal option - according to our SOPs - was a go-around. A manual landing during a LVO approach was only allowed with a CAT2 minimum, and the autopilot had to be disconnected latest at 80' AGL.

But that was changed with the introduction of the 0'-75m minimum. Then the only reason for a go-around below Alert Height was an ATC call or the AUTOLAND LIGHT. So the scenario of NO FLARE was not trained anymore during the sim sessions.
Unfortunately I cannot remeber whether NO FLARE would trigger the AUTOLAND LIGHT.

On the MD11 a no flare would be reason for a go-around during a CAT3 approach. Manual landings are not allowed with CAT3 minimums on the MD11.

Regards,
DBate

[Boroda]

Technically to give a tug & make a landing on Airbbus - no big deal. The problem is in my rights to do it.

[Boroda]

Thanks,

I have found it in FCOM 4 - if no flare at 30 feet and sufficient visual contact - AP off and comlete manual landing.

So it is only technical requirement before approach.

[Rainboe]

Our procedure....on an AWOPs approach, below DH....Autopilot disconnect.....GO AROUND. It is introduced in simulator checks to test whether the candidate will Go Around. It is a must do. If you have no flare, don't fight the A/P in a flare on a Cat 2 or 3 landing! Disengage and GTH out of there!

B737/B757

[Right Way Up]

Rainboe,
Out of interest what aircraft are you referring to?

[DBate]

I have found it in FCOM 4 - if no flare at 30 feet and sufficient visual contact - AP off and comlete manual landing.

Even with that being stated in the FCOM, I would rather prefer to go-around in such a case.

Usually PIC is PF during a CAT3 approach. The PNF would make the callout NO FLARE at wich altitude probably? I guess at around 30'. By the time the PF realises what has happened, disconnects the AP and flares for landing, you will already hit the runway in a not very favorable attitude.

[CharlieJuliet]

Many years ago we looked at autopilot disconnect below 50 ft. The only guaranteed successful outcomes were when a ga was carried out. Attempts to land often resulted in a high speed runway excursion due to lack of visual cues. Agreed the ga will result in runway contact, but it will only be a brief touch.

[NigelOnDraft]

Our QRH says (abbreviated) for Airbus A320 series:FAILURES BELOW 1000FT
Below 1000ft AAL the occurrence of any of the failures listed below necessitates a go-around, unless visual reference has already been acquired and can be maintained, and RVR is CAT 1 or better.
......
Unless visual reference is sufficient to disengage autopilot and complete manual landing, GO-AROUND in the event of:
....No FLARE mode at 30RI do not know if this is exactly the Airbus QRH, but we are moving in that direction ;)

In essence, IMHO, on an Autoland LVP approach, "any" event that requires discussion or decision is best handled by a GA. Even if you touch down in the GA that is a known / trained for process ;)

NoD

[777AV8R]

Not sure what any others aircraft require, but the 777 is definitely, 'Go Around' and with good reason.
Have any of you actually done a CAT IIIb at limits? Virtually impossible to determine when/where to flare during a maneuver like that.

[Rainboe]

I can't believe anybody would want to press ahead with a landing, possibly even attempting to override the autopilot, and plant it on the ground to attempt to land! Probably dropping bits off the aeroplane and bending bits that shouldn't be bent! Crazy! get the H out of there!

And don't fly another Cat3 approach until you understand what you are doing!

[Intruder]

744: Let it land. Do NOT disconnect the autopilot or autothrottles.

[Denti]

Out of our EU-OPS manual for 737 (mixed classic/NG operation):

RHS shall closely monitor all flight instruments throughout the landing, paying special attention to the FMA "FLARE" and
"RETARD" annunciations.

RHS shall call "NO FLARE" if "FLARE" is not annunciated.
RHS shall call "NO RETARD" if "RETARD" is not annunciated.

Crew actions in case of autopilot failure at or below decision height:
• For operations to actual RVR values less than 300m, a go-around is assumed in the event of an autopilot failure at
or below DH.
• This means that a go-around is the normal action.
• However the wording recognises that there may be circumstances where the safest action is to continue the landing. Such circumstances include the height at which the failure occurs, the actual Visual references, and other malfunctions. This would typically apply to the late stages of the flare.
• In conclusion it is not forbidden to continue the approach and complete the landing when the Commander or the pilot to whom the conduct of the flight has been delegated, determines that this is the safest course of action.


This is of course valid only for fail passive planes, fail operational equipped ones (in LAND 3 status) have an alert height of 200ft below which any single failure is suppressed and automatic landing and rollout is still assured. You will get any system failure and autoland downgrade messages once your speed is below 40 kts. So no flare should not happen.

[Mansfield]

For the 757/767, a "NO FLARE" annunciation is an automatic go-around. As has been mentioned, you will most likely touch down during the go-around, but the pitch up maneuver will insure a safe attitude at touchdown. Further, the power will be coming up, and there will be a positive climb almost immediately.

The real threat, if one should attempt a manual landing, is a bounced landing. The bounced landing recovery procedure would be problematic, to say the least. A go-around from the top of the bounce is probably not where you want to be, either. All things considered, a manual landing would be acceptable ONLY is the visual references were adequate for a flare and touchdown, which would be rather more than the visual references required for fail-passive CAT III minima. Probably wise to make this assessment a bit before the point at which you are expecting a FLARE annunciation. Otherwise, a simple flick of the thumb should do the trick.

[411A]

L1011 (the first widebody to be CATIII fail/operational approved, straight from the factory:ok:)

Manual flare, without disconnecting the autopilots.
IE: CWS in pitch mode with flare not captured.
Works like a charm.
No need to GA.

Fully approved.

[Dan Winterland]

Did you do the approach in CWS? The only aircraft I flew with CWS (747-300 with CWS in manual mode) would require all three autopilots to be switched from Command to Manual which clearly wasn't going to happen at such short notice.

Cat IIIb in a 744 with a DH of 0' FLARE GREEN comes in at 52' RA which is below MAB. You have to let it land. Ouch!

[411A]

Did you do the approach in CWS?
Negative....in Command.
However, IF flare was not captured at 50 feet Radio height, the pitch reverted to CWS, and a manual flare could be accomplished.

It does indeed work as advertised.

Proviso: Aircraft delivered to BA might well have been different...as there were several other differences with aircraft on the British civil register.

[Penworth]

Denti

Its interesting that your ops manual says to announce No Flare. In my company (737), our ops manual says:

If FLARE not annunciated, PM calls "Go Around"
IF RETARD not annunciated, PM calls "No Retard"

So for us, there's no ambiguity - lack of flare annunciation = go around.

[Denti]

We actually trained both cases, PICs discretion, go-around and continued landing. At least in the simulator both work out if you have the required minimum visual segment, never had a no flare in real life though. However since we started that fail operational stuff i haven't seen a no flare in the simulator either.

[411A]

Fail/Operational started with the 'ole L1011, and indeed, it works as advertised.
In over (approximately) 600 autolands with the 'ole TriStar, all have been right on the money.
No exceptions.

A superb airplane, make no mistake.
An oldie, but very good.

Just so you younger folks will know...proper automation started with Lockheed, long ago.
With proper RollsRoyce engines...the best in the business.:ok:

[mutley320]

Boroda, your looking for a reference and you mention you may have "adequate" visual reference, airbus gives you an option !
FCOM 4.05.70 " failures and associated actions; above/below 1,000ft."
It's in the pretty picture diagrams, CatII, CatIII with dh,CatIII no dh.

apologies, missed first page of posts, see you found reference.

[Port Strobe]

If this were to happen in a boeing, couldn't you just give the yoke a tug, or are the autopilot 'motors' too powerful??

Can only speak for 737NG here but wouldn't be surprised to find the same logic in other models. In approach mode pulling on the control wheel will disconnect the autopilot rather than perform a mode reversion to control wheel steering in the appropriate channel(s). When both autopilots are engaged and below c400' RA there's a hell of a lot of nose up trim loaded up so pulling firmly on the yoke would probably be the last thing you'd want to do, it would make more sense to brace your arm for the large out of trim force then press the disconnect button with your thumb and release some of the forward pressure you're applying in order to flare, however whether or not a manual landing is practical seems reasonably subjective.

[gubaclagan]

411A
I agree with you regarding TriStar L-1011 Autoland Fail Safe System. Have done the Autoland with the "Goldwire Wire Check" (Scheduled Maintenance Program) from G/S capture to Flare then to Rollout and it does llike it should be. Perfect simulation of CAT III.:ok: