MNM VIS for take-off/LVP at small airports
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: germany
Age: 52
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MNM VIS for take-off/LVP at small airports
Hi,
At e.g EDMS, take-off minimum is 250m but LVP must be in force (otherwise itīs 400m). EDMS is a small airport, when IFR flight are conducted, airspace F is activated. This airport does not have an established Low-visibility procedure.
Does this mean that 400m visibility (RVR not available at this airport!) is the lowest limit for take-off at this airport or would the tower controller be authorized to allow 250m vis take-offs provided e.g that only one aircraft at a time manouevers on the apron?
EU-OPS definition:
Low visibility procedures (LVP) "Procedures applied at an aerodrome for the purpose of ensuring safe operations during Lower than Standard Category I, Other than Standard Category II, Category II and III approaches and low visibility take-offs." - EU-OPS 1.435
Low visibility take-off (LVTO) "A take-off where the runway visual range (RVR) is less than 400 m." - EU-OPS 1.435
Note that ICAO requires LVP for all departures below 550m RVR, not just LVTO
At e.g EDMS, take-off minimum is 250m but LVP must be in force (otherwise itīs 400m). EDMS is a small airport, when IFR flight are conducted, airspace F is activated. This airport does not have an established Low-visibility procedure.
Does this mean that 400m visibility (RVR not available at this airport!) is the lowest limit for take-off at this airport or would the tower controller be authorized to allow 250m vis take-offs provided e.g that only one aircraft at a time manouevers on the apron?
EU-OPS definition:
Low visibility procedures (LVP) "Procedures applied at an aerodrome for the purpose of ensuring safe operations during Lower than Standard Category I, Other than Standard Category II, Category II and III approaches and low visibility take-offs." - EU-OPS 1.435
Low visibility take-off (LVTO) "A take-off where the runway visual range (RVR) is less than 400 m." - EU-OPS 1.435
Note that ICAO requires LVP for all departures below 550m RVR, not just LVTO
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: LHR
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would they publish a 250m minima if they can't implement LVP's? Are they planned to be introduced in the future?
RVR does not necessarily need to be a requirement. CMV or captains discretion (read decision) can be used at certain times.
RVR does not necessarily need to be a requirement. CMV or captains discretion (read decision) can be used at certain times.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: EPKT
Age: 44
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would they publish a 250m minima if they can't implement LVP's?
Guest
Posts: n/a
It's not really an ATC question.
In most States ATC will call for LVPs to put in place in accordance with airport or State procedures and tell pilots when this has been done. If an aircraft requests take-off or landing clearance ATC will issue a clearance if there are no traffic reasons to do otherwise.
In most States ATC will call for LVPs to put in place in accordance with airport or State procedures and tell pilots when this has been done. If an aircraft requests take-off or landing clearance ATC will issue a clearance if there are no traffic reasons to do otherwise.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. It is the operator's responsibility to check with the aerodrome operator whether an LVP is available or not, it is not the reponsibility of the chart provider.
2. The LVP may contain no pilot actions which might be a reason for not publishing it in the AIP.
3. If an LVP is available and the lower minima are not published, it will be an operational disadvantage fo the operator.
4. A conversion of a met VIS into an CMV is not allowed for take-off... but the RVR could be determined by the pilot.
2. The LVP may contain no pilot actions which might be a reason for not publishing it in the AIP.
3. If an LVP is available and the lower minima are not published, it will be an operational disadvantage fo the operator.
4. A conversion of a met VIS into an CMV is not allowed for take-off... but the RVR could be determined by the pilot.
