EU OPS/ LVTO 150 RVR requirements

[gigi116]

I am tring to write something on LVTO 150 Meters, but table 1 of Appendix 1 to OPS 1.430 is very ambiguos !

It seems on note 3 that RVR values can be "replaced" by Pilot assessment for "initial part of take off" in all RVR/VIS cases.

Following doubts arise :

- Is the "initial part" that part of the runway after threshold but before transmissiometer A ? (If answer is NO, why not to state "POINT A" instead?)

- As far as I know if any RVR below 200 meters, multiple RVR (A+B+C) are required by ICAO.

-The term "relevant RVR" disappeared from EU OPS / TGL 44 (it is part of rwy with speed above 60KIAS).

Thanks

[Kirks gusset]

I am curious as to what you are trying to write? the rules are clearly set down, I have just compared three separate company Part A and they are all, more or less word for word.

Pilot assessment of TDZ RVR, when practical, always overrides the reported RVR or met visibility. Pilot assessment, may not be practical where runways are humped or the RVR limit is high.

The reported RVR/Visibility representative of the initial part of the takeoff run may be replaced by pilot assessment.

The required RVR value MUST be achieved for all of the relevant RVR reporting points except as stated above.

Relevant RVR is defined as follows:

For takeoff; The RVR that reflects that portion of the runway required for the whole of the ground manoeuvre, including rejected takeoff.
For landing; The RVR that reflects the landing distance required down to a speed of 60kt’

You may be mixing Landing RVR and Take Off RVR, the subject is comprehensively covered in low vis and all weather ops.

KG

[FE Hoppy]

Kirk

would you like to give a reference for your definition of relevant?

As the op said. It's not in TGL44 or Sub E of EU OPS.

[safewing]

Are you referring to the commanders assessment of the 90m visual segment?

What it states is that if the point A (to use your reference) is less than the 150m or 125m (if authorised) RVR then the commander can look at the centreline lights which have 15m spacing. If he can see 6 lights then he can see a 90m visual segment and he can accept a takeoff clearance.

However is the RVR is at or above 150(125)m and you cannot see the 6 lights you must reject the takeoff clearance as you need confirmation with the visual segment- the important thing here is what you can actually see.

Another point to consider is airfields with displaced thresholds but departure points from full length of runway. It is possible that the centreline spacing before the threshold is 30m spacing and as far as I know you cannot count 3 of these as an equivalent to 6 centrelines so you must plan to depart from the displaced threshold point.

[Kirks gusset]

Sure, Pan Ops 8168 or EU OPS1 Aerodrome operating minima.

[FE Hoppy]

Don't wish to be a pedant kirks but while the landing case is covered by a note in EU OPS I don't find the definition for the take off.

I agree that "relevant" refers to the actual ASDR. However, it is not defined as such in either document as far as I can see.

[Kirks gusset]

FE, what exactly are you looking for? I'm confused.

Relevant, means just that.. wherever the RVR is quoted at that point of the runway, touchdown, midpoint, stopend.

For take off, the relevant RVR will refer to the initial part of the take off run, I cant see why you would need a clearer definition than that.

Maybe I am missing the point here, but we seem to be re-inventing the wheel?


KG

[FE Hoppy]

If I have 3 rvr values quoted for take off and the third is below my company minimums can I take off?

The answer is yes if the third rvr is not relevant.

So the question is how do we define relevant?
For landing relevant is until I'm below 60 kts.
But what about for take off?
It's not just the initial part, I don't even need that to be above min as I can replace that with pilot assessment.

[Kirks gusset]

Now I see where you are coming from so here's the answer:

If you are approved to take off in 125m, that is the minimum "reported" RVR required in all three points, touchdown, midpoint, stopend.

If the mid point is not available, the minimum increases to 150m in all sectors.

So, if the minimum is below these, or not reported, you can't go as the Pilot assessment case only applies to the initial line up point, NOT the mid point or stop end, which, you cannot see, of course.

You cannot factor met vis to RVR for low vis take offs and further restrictions apply for runway centre line and edge lighting cases.

Does this answer the question.. Not the original post, which I still don't understand the purpose of.

By the way, are you suggesting that if the tower report an RVR in the touchdown of 25m you are going to line up and say bugger it I can see 90m lets go?
KG

[FE Hoppy]

I'm not suggesting that at all.

I'm not sure that the stop end is always relevant though. This is the crux of the thread.

If I have an ASDR of 6000ft and a 9000ft runway the stop end is not relevant and therefore does not need to be 125m.

it's item E below.

4. Exceptions to paragraph (a)(3)(i) above:
(i) Subject to the approval of the Authority, and provided the requirements in paragraphs (A) to (E) below have been satisfied, an operator may reduce the take-off minima to 125 m RVR (Category A, B and C aeroplanes) or 150 m RVR (Category D aeroplanes) when:
(A) Low visibility procedures are in force;
(B) High intensity runway centreline lights spaced 15 m or less and high intensity edge lights spaced 60 m or less are in operation;
(C) Flight crew members have satisfactorily completed training in a flight simulator;
(D) A 90 m visual segment is available from the cockpit at the start of the take-off run; and
(E) The required RVR value has been achieved for all of the relevant RVR reporting points.


The question is:
Where can I find the definition of Relevant in this case?


For landing the definition of relevant is found in OPS 1.405 where it states:

The touch-down zone RVR is always controlling. If reported and relevant, the mid point and stop end RVR are also controlling. The minimum RVR value for the mid-point is 125 m or the RVR required for the touch-down zone if less, and 75 m for the stop-end. For aeroplanes equipped with a roll-out guidance or control system, the minimum RVR value for the mid-point is 75 m.

Note: “Relevant”, in this context, means that part of the runway used during the high speed phase of the landing down to a speed of approximately 60 knots.

[9.G]

FE Hoppy, in theory, you could shorten the ASD & TO distances to match the 2/3 of the RWY thus excluding the END. Relevant, for the take off, means either full stop or at the reference zero on the RWY in case of a aborted or continued take off respectively. Nowadays not difficult to do with the LPC performance software. Not sure if I'd recommend to do so as no accurate data is available on the aforesaid distances in relation to the RVR measurement portions. In reverse you can elect to perform a take off from the intersection excluding the TDZ RVR thus avoiding the assessment. Hope that helps.:ok:

[big d1]

Kirks gusset. You said that " If the mid point is not available, the minimum increases to 150m in all sectors"

My understanding is that if you do not have a MP RVR reading then the minimum vis/RVR for t/o is 200m since to be able to do a 125m or 150m RVR t/o (Cat A-C aircraft) you need multiple RVR and all the relevant RVR reporting points giving at least the above values. Do you have a ref. for your above statement?

Also my understanding is that to be able to carry out a 125m RVR t/o (Cat A-C aircraft) you need BOTH the 90m visual segment and a TDZ RVR of 125m? The way I have understood EU-OPS is that you cannot replace the TDZ value for a 125m RVR t/o with pilot assessment as the information for a 125m t/o does not include a sub note saying otherwise compared to the table in appendix 1 OPS 1.430 containing other value t/o which does include a sub note saying that the initial part can be replaced with pilot assessment.

Just as a side note. Am I correct in saying that down to 200m you can use either RVR or met vis values (e.g RVR read outs not available) for t/o but for 150m and 125m t/o you can only use RVR values?

[Kirks gusset]

1) Big D1, You are correct to an extent, if muliple RVRs, runway edge and centre line markings are not available then the minimums revert to 200m, However, in the case in question, the MID POINT RVR is not available, but the touchdown and stop end are, hence Multiple ( more than 1) RVRs ARE avialable and hence the minimum reverts to 150m ( PAN OPS 8168 EU OPS1 refers)

2) If you are given 125M and line up provided you can see 90M in the visual segment you can use this pilot assessment (see below).

3) You cannot factor met VIS to RVR for low vis take offs.( See below)

Takeoff Ban

Takeoff is not permitted if any of the following is below the relevant minimum:
(a) The RVR assessed by the Captain from the flight deck immediately before takeoff. (see Note)
(b) The reported Touch Down (TDZ) RVR or visibility
(c) The Mid-point RVR, when reported.
(d) The Stop-end RVR, if specified in the Performance
Manual. Otherwise, this RVR is for information only. (e) The cloud ceiling if specified in the Performance
Manual.
NOTE: Pilot assessment of TDZ RVR, when practical, always overrides the reported RVR or met visibility. Pilot assessment, may not be practical where runways are humped or the RVR limit is high.

Table 5 Refers to converting Met vis to RVR

Notes:
1 Table 5 may not be used for calculating takeoff minima or CAT II/III minima.
2 Table 5 may not be used when a reported RVR is available.

Lastly, the word RELEVANT, is used frequently by the authority throughout EU OPS and PAN OPS, they expect us to use it in the context provided e.g

The Commander will ensure all the RELEVANT airport facilities are operational for the approach, clearly they are not going to describe what is or is not Relevant as different equipment and operators may have a different requirement for the "Relevant" facilities

That's it for me guys, all done on this one KG

[big d1]

Kirks gusset

1) Surely if the MP RVR is not available, even if the TDZ and StopEnd are available (multiple RVR), sub note 4 says that 150m must be achieved at all the relevant RVR reporting points. Therefore for the aircraft I fly this is the TDZ and MP. Therefore even if you have got 150m at the StopEnd and TDZ I have not achieved the required RVR at the relevant reporting points (no MP), therefore I cannot do a 150m t/o.

2) I agree with what you have stated but say for example you were give TDZ 120m and MP 125m. Even if you had the 90m visual segment AND you could see 125m+ worth of centre line lights you still can't t/o because you have been given a TDZ RVR of 120m and this can't be replaced with pilot assessment for a 125m t/o (but can be for all other t/o's i.e sub note 3 in the table) I see from the table you have shown in your post which I am guessing is from your OPS manual says that any TDZ value can be replaced with pilot assessment, I am just not sure if it can be done for a 125m RVR t/o. The rest I agree can be replaced with pilot assessment.

3) I know that you can not factor met vis to RVR for low vis t/o, I was meaning a regular met vis value given when for example the RVR equipment is u/s. Am I correct in that you can use met vis values down to a minimum of 200m vis/RVR t/o? For 150m and 125m t/o you can only use RVR values.

[9.G]

big d1, RVR can be assessed by human observation not only using transmissiometers. 125 RVR for the initial part can be replaced by pilot assessment as well as per EU OPS nowadays. :ok:

[big d1]

Ah ok I must have been reading it wrong then all this time. The extra requirements for a 125m RVR t/o are just that, they are extra requirements. The sub note 3 about pilot assessment for the TDZ still therefore applies to 125m t/o. If you are given 120m for the TDZ you can replace it with pilot assessment but as long as you have the 90m visual segment as well (the extra requirement).

Kirks gusset. I stand corrected then on my idea about the TDZ for 125m t/o and agree with what you say fully. Your OPS manual makes it clearer than mine does.

Cheers guys/girls:ok: