Capt B-737
 

Eindhoven is listed in the Jeppesen as a CAT I ILS app.

On my last flight a low cost airline asked and was granted permition to execute a CAT III ILS app.

Anybody knows anything about any special authorizations?

Sounds highly illegal if you were in the UK as a Cat 1 system would not have the requisite safeguards which a Cat 111 system enjoys, both in regard to radiated signal, safeguarding and lighting system (Cat 111 requires touchdown zone lighting and supplementary approach lights where Cat 1 doesn't)

I would imagine that the request was for a practice Cat3 approach.
This could be executed in (Cat1 or better) conditions, but no protection would be given.

If the weather on the day was good, then it was probably for crew training/practice.:ok:
However, I'm unsure of the legalities of taking it past the Cat1 DH to the B737 CATIIIa DH of 50', as the company's SOPs should state a minimum alt for autopilot disengagement on a CAT1 system.

LJ

sometimes a practice cat3 is flown to autoland for evaluation purposes on request of the company.

CatIII in CatI RW
 

The visibility was 375 mts, with weather deteriorating. I was holding.

You got me stumped there ENP. as far as I know, Eindhoven is CAT1 only..... So we're back to your original question!! Apologies:ok:

LJ

It may be possible that the ILS is 'almost' general CatIII and perhaps the loco had an arrangement with the various parties to use it as such. I cannot imagine ATC otherwise 'clearing' an a/c for a CatIII approach on a Cat I ILS? Certainly the reverse is true, that an operational Cat III ILS may not be 'approved' by a particular airline.

In most situations, ATC will advise the availability of the ILS and any differences from the promulgated category of approach that it can support. After implementing LVPs, a Cat II/III ILS can be used to the relevant minima. As a controller, I have never cleared an aircraft for a Cat I, II or III approach, just an ILS approach - in broad terms it's up to the pilot to determine whether everything that is needed for his/her operation is in place.

As a principle, I think this is the general case but if the controller did clear an aircraft for something that is not published, presumably it is something agreed locally and written up in the procedures of both ATC and the aircraft operator.

If such a procedure were used, it would have to be in the company Ops manual and approved by the relevant aviation authorities both in the country where the aircraft is registered and the country where the procedure is taking place.

Absolute Minima defines the approach status for the various aids. So if an aircraft commences below the absolute minima a form of words defined by the CAA is read out, this basically warns the crew that they are open to legal action. This is the case within the UK.. Do airports in the rest of the European area work the same way?

There is no such thing as a practice CAT3 approach.
If the approach is CAT1 only it will be a practice AUTOLAND in CAT1 conditions applying CAT1 minima.