EVS minima in Europe part 91
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: US
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EVS minima in Europe part 91
Can anyone shine some light on this topic? Mainly, can one start the approach when airport minima are less then published minima and RVR using EVS?
Thanks
Thanks
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: GRD
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Voilà Monsieur:
"Operators conducting approach operations utilising EVS with RVR of 800 m or less shall comply with the requirements of Appendix 1 to OPS 1.450 — Low Visibility Operations — Training and Qualifications applicable to Category II operations to include the requirements applicable to HUD."
Appendix 1 (New) to OPS 1.430
(.......)
(h) Enhanced vision systems
1. A pilot using an enhanced vision system certificated for the purpose of this paragraph and used in accordance with the procedures and limitations of the approved flight manual, may:
(i) continue an approach below DH or MDH to 100 feet above the threshold elevation of the runway provided that at least one of the following visual references is displayed and identifiable on the enhanced vision system:
(A) elements of the approach lighting; or
(B) the runway threshold, identified by at least one of the following: the beginning of the runway landing surface, the threshold lights, the threshold identification lights; and the touchdown zone, iden- tified by at least one of the following: the runway touchdown zone landing surface, the touchdown zone lights, the touchdown zone markings or the runway lights;
(ii) reduce the calculated RVR/CMV for the approach from the value in column 1 of Table 9 below to the value in column 2:
RvR 550 / EVS 350...
And so on refer to the table on the appendix.
EVS gives you the ability to continue the approach at MDA/DA providing you have visual ref through EVS..but as for the approach minimas and requirements they stay the same.
"Operators conducting approach operations utilising EVS with RVR of 800 m or less shall comply with the requirements of Appendix 1 to OPS 1.450 — Low Visibility Operations — Training and Qualifications applicable to Category II operations to include the requirements applicable to HUD."
Appendix 1 (New) to OPS 1.430
(.......)
(h) Enhanced vision systems
1. A pilot using an enhanced vision system certificated for the purpose of this paragraph and used in accordance with the procedures and limitations of the approved flight manual, may:
(i) continue an approach below DH or MDH to 100 feet above the threshold elevation of the runway provided that at least one of the following visual references is displayed and identifiable on the enhanced vision system:
(A) elements of the approach lighting; or
(B) the runway threshold, identified by at least one of the following: the beginning of the runway landing surface, the threshold lights, the threshold identification lights; and the touchdown zone, iden- tified by at least one of the following: the runway touchdown zone landing surface, the touchdown zone lights, the touchdown zone markings or the runway lights;
(ii) reduce the calculated RVR/CMV for the approach from the value in column 1 of Table 9 below to the value in column 2:
RvR 550 / EVS 350...
And so on refer to the table on the appendix.
EVS gives you the ability to continue the approach at MDA/DA providing you have visual ref through EVS..but as for the approach minimas and requirements they stay the same.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But before all of that, don't forget...
OPS 1.440 Low visibility operations - General operating rules
(c) An operator shall not conduct lower than Standard Category I operations unless approved by the Authority.
.... that Authority being EASA.
MT
OPS 1.440 Low visibility operations - General operating rules
(c) An operator shall not conduct lower than Standard Category I operations unless approved by the Authority.
.... that Authority being EASA.
MT
Last edited by Mach Tuck; 5th Dec 2012 at 15:56.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Age: 69
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EVS minima in Europe part 91
Using EVS to meet the visibility requirements of an approach does not affect the category of the approach.
For example, a Cat I ILS with a visibility requirement of 550 meters is still a Cat I approach when the RVR is reported to be 350 meters and the pilot uses EVS to meet the 550 meter requirement. If the pilot sees "EVS Lights" at or before the DA, it means the approach's visibility requirement of at least 550 meters has been met. He is now allowed to continue the approach to 100 ft above touchdown. If the pilot sees with his eyeballs a runway (not approach lights) at or before the 100 ft DA, he may land. The RVR being reported as 350 meters does not make this a less-than-Cat I operation. In accordance with EUR OPS 1.430 Appendix 1, Table 9, the reported RVR cannot be less 350 meters, otherwise the approach cannot be attempted.
Guidance from 1.440 about less-than-Cat I operations is not relevant to the example above.
Another example: When flying into the Isle of Mann, be aware that EUR OPS 1 is not relevant. They have their own regs. To use EVS there, you must first register the aircraft and the operator, proving the aircraft is certified and the pilots have been trained.
The opinion of a pilot with 7 years of EVS approaches in Gulfstreams.
For example, a Cat I ILS with a visibility requirement of 550 meters is still a Cat I approach when the RVR is reported to be 350 meters and the pilot uses EVS to meet the 550 meter requirement. If the pilot sees "EVS Lights" at or before the DA, it means the approach's visibility requirement of at least 550 meters has been met. He is now allowed to continue the approach to 100 ft above touchdown. If the pilot sees with his eyeballs a runway (not approach lights) at or before the 100 ft DA, he may land. The RVR being reported as 350 meters does not make this a less-than-Cat I operation. In accordance with EUR OPS 1.430 Appendix 1, Table 9, the reported RVR cannot be less 350 meters, otherwise the approach cannot be attempted.
Guidance from 1.440 about less-than-Cat I operations is not relevant to the example above.
Another example: When flying into the Isle of Mann, be aware that EUR OPS 1 is not relevant. They have their own regs. To use EVS there, you must first register the aircraft and the operator, proving the aircraft is certified and the pilots have been trained.
The opinion of a pilot with 7 years of EVS approaches in Gulfstreams.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: in the pub
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fox2kill,
You are correct in the tables to use, however as FCS_TEST states Appendix 1 to OPS 1.450 h) 3. states that to use the EVS for RVRs lower than 800m, training and qualifications for Cat II standards are required.
Unless you are therefore Cat II qualified in EASA land, you cannot use the EVS reduction to RVR.
SKP
You are correct in the tables to use, however as FCS_TEST states Appendix 1 to OPS 1.450 h) 3. states that to use the EVS for RVRs lower than 800m, training and qualifications for Cat II standards are required.
Unless you are therefore Cat II qualified in EASA land, you cannot use the EVS reduction to RVR.
SKP
Last edited by Steak&Kidney_Pie; 18th Jan 2013 at 16:53.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Essex, England
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unless you are therefore Cat II qualified in EASA land, you cannot use the EVS reduction to RVR.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: in the pub
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies Sooty,
I didn't necessarily make the statement clear.
Regardless of the country of registration, Cat II (LVOps) would need to be approved by an EASA authority. Now this process is clearly documented for an EASA registered aircraft as per regulation. However I'm not sure how, for example, an N-reg operator would deal with this!
I am unsure as to whether once approved, this can be used outside of EASA states, as this document only refers to EASA. I will attempt to check and get back to you.
EASA are happy with reducing the minimums for operators/aircraft approved under their system.
SKP
I didn't necessarily make the statement clear.
Regardless of the country of registration, Cat II (LVOps) would need to be approved by an EASA authority. Now this process is clearly documented for an EASA registered aircraft as per regulation. However I'm not sure how, for example, an N-reg operator would deal with this!
I am unsure as to whether once approved, this can be used outside of EASA states, as this document only refers to EASA. I will attempt to check and get back to you.
EASA are happy with reducing the minimums for operators/aircraft approved under their system.
SKP
Last edited by Steak&Kidney_Pie; 19th Jan 2013 at 07:49. Reason: Further thought...
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Age: 69
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EVS minima in Europe part 91
Steak&Kidney Pie;
EU OPS 1.450 guidance does not apply to Standard Category I operations; so, neither does its Appendix 1.
In my previous post, the example I gave was of a Standard Category I ILS approach. An RVR lower than the approach chart's minima does NOT suddenly make it a lower-than-Standard Category I operation. Certainly, if you don't have EVS, then you can't fly the approach and would therefore be required to conduct some other operation more suitable to landing in such conditions.
But, EVS changes everything. It provides an opportunity to meet the visibility requirement with a sensor, instead of eyeballs. And doing so does NOT change the type of operation being conducted.
Here in the US, we have no Table 9, and a Part 91 operator can fly a Standard Category I ILS approach when the RVR is zero. An RVR of zero does not make this approach a Category III ILS; but, it does make a landing highly unlikely.
I teach EVS, so I know how hard it is for pilots new to this technology to adopt the idea that EVS renders the RVR irrelevant with regard to flying the approach. RVR then becomes relevant only with regard to what the pilots might see with their eyeballs at the 100 ft DA.
An RVR less than 350 meters will make it impossible for a pilot to see a runway with his eyeballs when he reaches 100 ft above touchdown on a 3 degree glideslope. I am grateful that better logic prevails in Europe where the regulators created Table 9 to keep pilots from flying an approach with EVS when the RVR will certainly preclude a landing. I hope the FAA will one day adopt Table 9.
EU OPS 1.450 guidance does not apply to Standard Category I operations; so, neither does its Appendix 1.
In my previous post, the example I gave was of a Standard Category I ILS approach. An RVR lower than the approach chart's minima does NOT suddenly make it a lower-than-Standard Category I operation. Certainly, if you don't have EVS, then you can't fly the approach and would therefore be required to conduct some other operation more suitable to landing in such conditions.
But, EVS changes everything. It provides an opportunity to meet the visibility requirement with a sensor, instead of eyeballs. And doing so does NOT change the type of operation being conducted.
Here in the US, we have no Table 9, and a Part 91 operator can fly a Standard Category I ILS approach when the RVR is zero. An RVR of zero does not make this approach a Category III ILS; but, it does make a landing highly unlikely.
I teach EVS, so I know how hard it is for pilots new to this technology to adopt the idea that EVS renders the RVR irrelevant with regard to flying the approach. RVR then becomes relevant only with regard to what the pilots might see with their eyeballs at the 100 ft DA.
An RVR less than 350 meters will make it impossible for a pilot to see a runway with his eyeballs when he reaches 100 ft above touchdown on a 3 degree glideslope. I am grateful that better logic prevails in Europe where the regulators created Table 9 to keep pilots from flying an approach with EVS when the RVR will certainly preclude a landing. I hope the FAA will one day adopt Table 9.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: ULLI
Age: 49
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all,
Now I'm lost! I'm in charge of a new operation with a 7X G registered and UK AOC. I was not aware cat II was mandatory to get EVS credit!
Is there any kind of waiver?
The 7X is supposed to get EVS certification by the end of Feb, and I'm supposed to manage the EVS training ASAP!
Do you believe FlightSafety and CAE will be ready soon?
Now I'm lost! I'm in charge of a new operation with a 7X G registered and UK AOC. I was not aware cat II was mandatory to get EVS credit!
Is there any kind of waiver?
The 7X is supposed to get EVS certification by the end of Feb, and I'm supposed to manage the EVS training ASAP!
Do you believe FlightSafety and CAE will be ready soon?
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Age: 69
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EVS minima in Europe part 91
Tom35;
Please indulge me as I attempt to rebuild your SA on this complicated subject.
No, your pilots do not have to get Cat II qualified in order to use EVS to meet the visibility requirements of a Standard Category I approach. An earlier post cited the following: "Operators conducting approach operations utilising EVS with RVR of 800 m or less shall comply with the requirements of Appendix 1 to OPS 1.450 — Low Visibility Operations — Training and Qualifications applicable to Category II operations to include the requirements applicable to HUD." This statement was extracted from Appendix 1 to EU OPS 1.450, which is not relevant to Standard Category I approaches.
Both FlightSafety and CAE will be ready for your training. Their courses must be approved by the regulators, who will ensure they meet all the requirements expressed in EU OPS 1, FAA AC 90-106, and the EASA OSB Report on the Falcon 7X (see http://www.easa.europa.eu/certificat...nt%20Final.pdf).
Contact your training-provider to get help in adding the right stuff to your AOC, Operations Manual, and training programs.
Don't worry, EVS is all-good.
Please indulge me as I attempt to rebuild your SA on this complicated subject.
No, your pilots do not have to get Cat II qualified in order to use EVS to meet the visibility requirements of a Standard Category I approach. An earlier post cited the following: "Operators conducting approach operations utilising EVS with RVR of 800 m or less shall comply with the requirements of Appendix 1 to OPS 1.450 — Low Visibility Operations — Training and Qualifications applicable to Category II operations to include the requirements applicable to HUD." This statement was extracted from Appendix 1 to EU OPS 1.450, which is not relevant to Standard Category I approaches.
Both FlightSafety and CAE will be ready for your training. Their courses must be approved by the regulators, who will ensure they meet all the requirements expressed in EU OPS 1, FAA AC 90-106, and the EASA OSB Report on the Falcon 7X (see http://www.easa.europa.eu/certificat...nt%20Final.pdf).
Contact your training-provider to get help in adding the right stuff to your AOC, Operations Manual, and training programs.
Don't worry, EVS is all-good.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Age: 69
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EVS minima in Europe part 91
CJ2driver;
Allow me re-phrase your question slightly so that I may answer it more precisely. Can a pilot using EVS start the approach when the reported RVR is less than the published minima? The answer is yes. With a few caveats.
The aircraft has a certified EFVS (enhanced flight vision system, which is EVS displayed in a HUD). The pilot is qualified, having attended an approved training course. In Europe, the reported RVR must not be less than that specified in EU OPS 1.430, Appendix 1, Table 9. Commercial operators must be authorized via their AOC or OPSpecs, and the procedures must be detailed in their Operations Manual. US Part 91 operators are authorized in accordance with AC 90-106 and do NOT need an LOA to use EVS for Standard Category I operations. Other regulations, such as 14 CFR 91.175 in the US, may apply and approved training courses will cover these issues.
Allow me re-phrase your question slightly so that I may answer it more precisely. Can a pilot using EVS start the approach when the reported RVR is less than the published minima? The answer is yes. With a few caveats.
The aircraft has a certified EFVS (enhanced flight vision system, which is EVS displayed in a HUD). The pilot is qualified, having attended an approved training course. In Europe, the reported RVR must not be less than that specified in EU OPS 1.430, Appendix 1, Table 9. Commercial operators must be authorized via their AOC or OPSpecs, and the procedures must be detailed in their Operations Manual. US Part 91 operators are authorized in accordance with AC 90-106 and do NOT need an LOA to use EVS for Standard Category I operations. Other regulations, such as 14 CFR 91.175 in the US, may apply and approved training courses will cover these issues.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: in the pub
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fox2kill,
OPS 1.450 has to be applied to approaches carried out using EVS, not approaches other than CAT I. Read the first line of the document, and then section 1.450! If approaches are carried out using EVS, then this applies, and therefore certification for Cat II is required. How do you read this differently???
SKP
OPS 1.450 has to be applied to approaches carried out using EVS, not approaches other than CAT I. Read the first line of the document, and then section 1.450! If approaches are carried out using EVS, then this applies, and therefore certification for Cat II is required. How do you read this differently???
SKP
Last edited by Steak&Kidney_Pie; 20th Jan 2013 at 12:32.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: in the pub
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tom35,
According to EU-OPS as I read it, you will need to be certified to CATII with HUD Training if you wish to fly an approach using EVS. I fly the F2TH EXy and have completed the course at CAE Burgess Hill.
I am keen to see what happens with the EFVS certification as currently it is useless!
SKP
According to EU-OPS as I read it, you will need to be certified to CATII with HUD Training if you wish to fly an approach using EVS. I fly the F2TH EXy and have completed the course at CAE Burgess Hill.
I am keen to see what happens with the EFVS certification as currently it is useless!
SKP
Last edited by Steak&Kidney_Pie; 20th Jan 2013 at 12:20.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Age: 69
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EVS minima in Europe part 91
EU OPS 1.450 begins with "An operator shall ensure that, prior to conducting low visibility take-off, lower than Standard Category I, other than Standard
Category II, Category II and III operations or approaches utilising EVS:..."
That means it applies only to:
1. Low visibility take-offs
2. Lower-than-Standard Category I approaches
3. Other-than-standard Category II approaches
4. Category II approaches
5. Category III approaches
It does NOT apply to Standard Category I approaches.
You absolutely do NOT need to be Cat II qualified to use EVS on Standard Category I approaches.
Category II, Category II and III operations or approaches utilising EVS:..."
That means it applies only to:
1. Low visibility take-offs
2. Lower-than-Standard Category I approaches
3. Other-than-standard Category II approaches
4. Category II approaches
5. Category III approaches
It does NOT apply to Standard Category I approaches.
You absolutely do NOT need to be Cat II qualified to use EVS on Standard Category I approaches.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Age: 69
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EVS minima in Europe part 91
Tom35;
Talk to your training provider. Both FlightSafety and CAE will tell you that your pilots do NOT need Cat II training and qualification to fly Standard Category I approaches using EVS to meet the visibility requirements.
Their EVS training course is approved by the regulators who ensure the course covers all the requirements of EU OPS 1.430, Appendix 1, paragraph (h), FAA AC 90-106, and the Falcon 7X OEB Report, Chapter 15.
Trust what they tell you because they're correct.
Talk to your training provider. Both FlightSafety and CAE will tell you that your pilots do NOT need Cat II training and qualification to fly Standard Category I approaches using EVS to meet the visibility requirements.
Their EVS training course is approved by the regulators who ensure the course covers all the requirements of EU OPS 1.430, Appendix 1, paragraph (h), FAA AC 90-106, and the Falcon 7X OEB Report, Chapter 15.
Trust what they tell you because they're correct.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: in the pub
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fox2kill,
In your own statement from 1.450,
QUOTE:
EU OPS 1.450 begins with "An operator shall ensure that, prior to conducting low visibility take-off, lower than Standard Category I, other than Standard
Category II, Category II and III operations or approaches utilising EVS:..."
What are the last four words? You are reading this to suit your own ends. It has nothing to do with Cat I approaches. APPROACHES UTILISING EVS. Read 1.450 in full
Tom35,
I would strongly suggest that you talk to your Authority before you trust the words of FSI or CAE who have let me down on the rules on more than one occasion.
SKP
In your own statement from 1.450,
QUOTE:
EU OPS 1.450 begins with "An operator shall ensure that, prior to conducting low visibility take-off, lower than Standard Category I, other than Standard
Category II, Category II and III operations or approaches utilising EVS:..."
What are the last four words? You are reading this to suit your own ends. It has nothing to do with Cat I approaches. APPROACHES UTILISING EVS. Read 1.450 in full
Tom35,
I would strongly suggest that you talk to your Authority before you trust the words of FSI or CAE who have let me down on the rules on more than one occasion.
SKP
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fox2kill
Quote
"In my previous post, the example I gave was of a Standard Category I ILS approach. An RVR lower than the approach chart's minima does NOT suddenly make it a lower-than-Standard Category I operation."
I think you will find that an RVR lower that the charted minimum is EXACTLY what makes it a lower than Standard Category I operation.
OPS 1.435, Terminology, para 16 refers:
"Lower than Standard Category I Operation". A Category I Instrument Approach and Landing Operation using Category I DH, with an RVR lower than would normally be associated with the applicable DH.
MT
Quote
"In my previous post, the example I gave was of a Standard Category I ILS approach. An RVR lower than the approach chart's minima does NOT suddenly make it a lower-than-Standard Category I operation."
I think you will find that an RVR lower that the charted minimum is EXACTLY what makes it a lower than Standard Category I operation.
OPS 1.435, Terminology, para 16 refers:
"Lower than Standard Category I Operation". A Category I Instrument Approach and Landing Operation using Category I DH, with an RVR lower than would normally be associated with the applicable DH.
MT
Join Date: May 2010
Location: europe
Age: 67
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so simple really.........I can't understand what the confusion is all about!
EASA certainly know how to write the regs in plain English....can you imagine what that must be like to translate for all the other States, and all the possible interpretations?
EASA certainly know how to write the regs in plain English....can you imagine what that must be like to translate for all the other States, and all the possible interpretations?
