Minima ? what is going on out there?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Prague
Age: 53
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minima ? what is going on out there?
Hi, i was commuting to Prague this evening, and when we landed, i could not see the wing, so i cross checked RVR and Cat 2 min.
Arrival 2142Z
Metar 132120 02003KT 0150 R24/0225N R31/0175N FZFG VV001 M02/M01 Q1016
Cat 2 min RwY 24 300 RVR.(unless N-registered)
whow about approach ban?????????????
What is going on ?
Arrival 2142Z
Metar 132120 02003KT 0150 R24/0225N R31/0175N FZFG VV001 M02/M01 Q1016
Cat 2 min RwY 24 300 RVR.(unless N-registered)
whow about approach ban?????????????
What is going on ?
Guest
Posts: n/a
LKPR 132200Z 07003KT 0150 R24/0225N R31/0200N FZFG VV001 M02/M02 Q1017 0615//95 1319//95 NOSIG
LKPR 132130Z 02002KT 0150 R24/0225N R31/0175N FZFG VV001 M01/M02 Q1017 0615//95 1319//95 NOSIG
LKPR 132100Z 35002KT 0150 R24/0250N R31/0200N FZFG VV001 M02/M02 Q1018 0615//95 1319//95 NOSIG
Seems like RVR was below 300 meters most of the time. What runway did you use?
With calm winds like that landing in any direction would be possible, and runway 24 is CATIII approved.
LKPR 132130Z 02002KT 0150 R24/0225N R31/0175N FZFG VV001 M01/M02 Q1017 0615//95 1319//95 NOSIG
LKPR 132100Z 35002KT 0150 R24/0250N R31/0200N FZFG VV001 M02/M02 Q1018 0615//95 1319//95 NOSIG
Seems like RVR was below 300 meters most of the time. What runway did you use?
With calm winds like that landing in any direction would be possible, and runway 24 is CATIII approved.
Thanos,
Before getting too excited and not a little accusatory, you should check the facts.
Prg 24 is a Cat III runway.
BTW you should have been able to see the wing, I suggest the windows were obscured.
Before getting too excited and not a little accusatory, you should check the facts.
Prg 24 is a Cat III runway.
BTW you should have been able to see the wing, I suggest the windows were obscured.
Last edited by Right Way Up; 14th Jan 2008 at 09:27.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Location
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yo Thanos,
Unless you were sitting at the point end ... you don't know what went on.
You can do a CAT IIIb onto R24 at PRG, and that requires only 75m.
Let the the boys do their job up front and you just sit and enjoy your gin and tonic in the back !
If you feel you can't trust the crew to fly you there, then I suggest you drive in future
Unless you were sitting at the point end ... you don't know what went on.
You can do a CAT IIIb onto R24 at PRG, and that requires only 75m.
Let the the boys do their job up front and you just sit and enjoy your gin and tonic in the back !
If you feel you can't trust the crew to fly you there, then I suggest you drive in future
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would suggest that a quick 'back to basics' course in how aeroplanes land on runways would be in order if we're trying to guage RVR by looking out along the wing. Are you familiar with the direction it points in with regard to the landing direction? 
When there is an R in front of the runway then that means that it is an RVR and the N means no change (not North!). U would mean RVR increasing and D decreasing.
I think we are all being wound up.
Bellwether&cloudbuster
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can confirm with a friend of mine who flew into Prague that the wing edge was not visible, and the end of it could only be seen when the lights were turned on and the light could be seen.
Only half a speed-brake
There is no such thing as an approach ban in Czech. Welcome to the world outside UK. It is operator's/commander's responsibility to observe applicable minima and procedures. Prague RWY 24 is CAT IIIb ICAO, European minima are:
C3b RVR 75 m
C3a RVR 200 m
C2 RVR 300 m.
If your aircraft was equipped for C III and crew approved to execute such approaches, which I suppose so, all worked as advertised. Your airline is proud to have safely brought you to the destination in such poor weather, and quite rightly so. Job well done.
FD (the un-real)
C3b RVR 75 m
C3a RVR 200 m
C2 RVR 300 m.
If your aircraft was equipped for C III and crew approved to execute such approaches, which I suppose so, all worked as advertised. Your airline is proud to have safely brought you to the destination in such poor weather, and quite rightly so. Job well done.
FD (the un-real)
FD,
Approach ban is not a UK limitation it is a JAR one. (1.405) The term is an old one but still applies that you cannot pass the marker or equivalent point unless the RVR is equal or better to minima.
Approach ban is not a UK limitation it is a JAR one. (1.405) The term is an old one but still applies that you cannot pass the marker or equivalent point unless the RVR is equal or better to minima.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minima
ALTFLAPS
I have been flying heavy aircraft for many years and the cat3b limit has been 100m the 75m has been the stop end limit and not the threshhold or mid point limit, you must be flying something very special.
I have been flying heavy aircraft for many years and the cat3b limit has been 100m the 75m has been the stop end limit and not the threshhold or mid point limit, you must be flying something very special.
Ut Sementem Feeceris
Bluasfly,
I fly the Airbus narrow body series (A319/20/21) and we operate to CAT 3B with RVR requirement of 75m and NO Decision height.
The worst RVR I've ever landed in was 100/100/100 but the Met Viz on the ATIS was 25m
(had to listen twice to make sure we heard it correctly). The landing was normal but the taxiing from the runway to stand was VERY slow - 25m was probably about right.
Sounds to me like the PRG flight was all operated correctly in accordance with JAR-OPS.
A4
PS The CFM56 doesn't like taxiing in FZFG - I've never seen Fan blade icing accumulate so quickly even with EAI on.
A4
I fly the Airbus narrow body series (A319/20/21) and we operate to CAT 3B with RVR requirement of 75m and NO Decision height.
The worst RVR I've ever landed in was 100/100/100 but the Met Viz on the ATIS was 25m
(had to listen twice to make sure we heard it correctly). The landing was normal but the taxiing from the runway to stand was VERY slow - 25m was probably about right.Sounds to me like the PRG flight was all operated correctly in accordance with JAR-OPS.
A4
PS The CFM56 doesn't like taxiing in FZFG - I've never seen Fan blade icing accumulate so quickly even with EAI on.
A4
Ut Sementem Feeceris
Hello Hahn
Yes, I appreciate that but the CFM-56 on the A319 does seem to aquire blade ice very quickly. Engineers have told me that the same engine on the B737 series does not aquire ice at anywhere near the same rate. It's been a while but I don't recall it being a problem on the V2500's either.
I recall landing in FZFG. It was "CAVOK" on top and the fog tops were about 600 feet agl, surface temp -3. By the time we were on stand perhaps after 7-8 minutes in the fog each blade had approx 2-3mm of ice on the back of the blades - not easily noticeable on a dark, foggy and cold walk round.
Engineers did their best but during the 15 second run up prior to departure the N1 vibs hit 6.5 momentarily before settling down to <1 - and off we went.
A4
Yes, I appreciate that but the CFM-56 on the A319 does seem to aquire blade ice very quickly. Engineers have told me that the same engine on the B737 series does not aquire ice at anywhere near the same rate. It's been a while but I don't recall it being a problem on the V2500's either.
I recall landing in FZFG. It was "CAVOK" on top and the fog tops were about 600 feet agl, surface temp -3. By the time we were on stand perhaps after 7-8 minutes in the fog each blade had approx 2-3mm of ice on the back of the blades - not easily noticeable on a dark, foggy and cold walk round.
Engineers did their best but during the 15 second run up prior to departure the N1 vibs hit 6.5 momentarily before settling down to <1 - and off we went.
A4
Yep. For me 75 meters of RVR are enough to land in cat IIIB. I heard that the 75 meters RVR are there to enable the pilots to vacate the runway AFTER landing, and taxi to the gate. The landing itself is irrelevant (as there is no DH)
Cat IIIC would be 0 RVR. This would mean you need an auto coupled guidance to the gate. this does not exist as we all know. But some time ago when the system was invented and all these different ILS integrities were made, it was contemplated.
It was considered too expensive, so hence there is no cat IIIC. (0 RVR requirement)
I guess the landing in prague was completely legal.
Cat IIIC would be 0 RVR. This would mean you need an auto coupled guidance to the gate. this does not exist as we all know. But some time ago when the system was invented and all these different ILS integrities were made, it was contemplated.
It was considered too expensive, so hence there is no cat IIIC. (0 RVR requirement)
I guess the landing in prague was completely legal.