Can we perform autoland with ils cat1 signal?
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: munich/frg
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
having read all the previous comments, here comes the question of a non-professional: what is the senes of doing an autoland under catI conditions? do u guys donīt like doing it yourself?
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: England
Posts: 1,050
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You will have a requirement to do a certain number of them, between each sim check, as part of maintaining your personal All Weather Operation qualification.
Now, if the weather isn't crap enough often enough, you may well have to do a few 'practice' autolands in good weather.
pb
Now, if the weather isn't crap enough often enough, you may well have to do a few 'practice' autolands in good weather.
pb
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: on the Blue Planet
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reasons?
- demonstrate the reliability to the authorities
- check the system
- train LOVIS approach procedures
- used when tired
- makes marvellous landings at lower flaps setting
- demonstrate the reliability to the authorities
- check the system
- train LOVIS approach procedures
- used when tired
- makes marvellous landings at lower flaps setting
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Summer
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by loc22550
You can but As long as CAT1 IS NOT display on your FMA.
If CAT1 is display on the FMA you are not allowed to do an autoland. (well at least for airbus).
If CAT1 is display on the FMA you are not allowed to do an autoland. (well at least for airbus).
When is that the FMA displays "CAT 1" ? Is that pre-programmed in the MDCU/FMS ? Is autolanding still selectable in "CAT 1" on the Airbus even if it shouldn't ? Does the FMA it ever display "CAT 2" ?
Last one, after landing, is the APPR mode and related light supposed to disarm automatically ?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do automatic approach/lands (autolands) in CAT I (or better) conditions?
Oh dear, quite simple really, with regard to the aeroplane that positively does 'em best...the good 'ole Lockheed TriStar.
Simply put, to watch PFM* at work.
NB.
*PFM....pure friggin' magic.
Oh dear, quite simple really, with regard to the aeroplane that positively does 'em best...the good 'ole Lockheed TriStar.
Simply put, to watch PFM* at work.
NB.
*PFM....pure friggin' magic.
Only half a speed-brake
Originally Posted by el !
When is that the FMA displays "CAT 1" ?
Originally Posted by el !
Is autolanding still selectable in "CAT 1" on the Airbus even if it shouldn't?
Originally Posted by el !
Does the FMA it ever display "CAT 2" ?
Originally Posted by el !
after landing, is the APPR mode and related light supposed to disarm automatically ?
Cheers,
FD (the un-real)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hi there, interesting subject. Well despite the fact that auto land doesn't have anything to do with weather it very much depends on the quality of the ILS signals and accuracy. A little background information of two ILS facilities ILS CAT I does have two waves 150 and 90 Hz both on LOC and GS whereas CAT II-III ILS has got additionally a carrier wave which enhances the accuracy significantly. Here are the parameter of both ILS certifications
CAT I max deviation LOC +/- 10m TDZ; GS +/-3m TDZ
CAT II/III max deviation LOC +/- 5m TDZ, MID, ROLL OUT, GS +/- 1,2m TDZ
As one can see there's quite significant difference in accuracy and area of application ergo the recommendation. Theoretically one shouldn't ever experience a LOC shift on CAT III ILS ground facility.
Auto land is not CAT 3. An automatic landing system is only an equipment providing automatic control of the aircraft during the approach and landing and is not related to particular weather conditions. This system is mandatory for all CAT 3 operations. However, it is a common practice to perform automatic landing in good visibility but in that case, the ILS performance must be sufficient and ILS signals protected.
CAT I max deviation LOC +/- 10m TDZ; GS +/-3m TDZ
CAT II/III max deviation LOC +/- 5m TDZ, MID, ROLL OUT, GS +/- 1,2m TDZ
As one can see there's quite significant difference in accuracy and area of application ergo the recommendation. Theoretically one shouldn't ever experience a LOC shift on CAT III ILS ground facility.
Auto land is not CAT 3. An automatic landing system is only an equipment providing automatic control of the aircraft during the approach and landing and is not related to particular weather conditions. This system is mandatory for all CAT 3 operations. However, it is a common practice to perform automatic landing in good visibility but in that case, the ILS performance must be sufficient and ILS signals protected.
Only half a speed-brake
Therefore some operators may restrict autoland operations to CAT III equipped runways only where the signal geometry is guaranteed. What is the difference between CATI and CAT III on such a runway? Basically, the area on ground is not protected as much as CATIII operations require and back up electricity system may not be available in no-break mode (for CAT III the backup generator must be up and running and on-line). Other operators leave this to commanders responsibility.
Some aerodromes (speaking CDG) even have procedure for practice autolands in cat I conditions when ATC would clear the ground area and increase separation in order not to block the singnal during landing (e.g. by departing aircraft temporarily shielding the LOC antenna).
FD
(the un-real)
Some aerodromes (speaking CDG) even have procedure for practice autolands in cat I conditions when ATC would clear the ground area and increase separation in order not to block the singnal during landing (e.g. by departing aircraft temporarily shielding the LOC antenna).
FD
(the un-real)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: A oneworld lounge near you
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love this discussion
Just a few quick points before I hit the sack, somewhat tired on a fatal overrun investigation at the moment...
1. The beam needs to be good enough. There is no way that you have sufficient information in the cockpit to determine this. There is no legal requirement to publish the information about the "straightness" of the beams for a CAT I ILS.
2. Some very large airports to not protect the ILS GP anything like enough in visual conditions. If a 744 taxies in front of the GP, then in certain conditions, it can deflect the beam to 1 degree, which would make your approach fun. Hence some of the reasons for LVPs at airports.
3. The wrong holding points will be in use, hence potential interference.
4. Some idiot at the airport will have decided not to protect the instrument runway strip and have work going on there as the runway landings are visual. Australia especially bad at this. If you fall off, you could be in trouble.
5. Beam deflection from the aircraft ahead on approach (had a GP drop out with this, but very unusual) but LOC can go all over the place, as well as the deviation swing of LOC from the overflight.
6. The terrain may upset your radalt based calls. Hence, if you look in the UK Integrated AIP, you will find a special note about Manchester and CAT II operations onto Runway 06L, as an example. (too late for me to remember if it is an AIC or an AIS) but applies to C/D categories of approach speed but not A/B
7. The terrain may upset the automatics, it can be fun to watch them on autoland trials with downhill runways, having had an uphill approach, float, float, float ooops spool up go-around.
8. Do you have a safety management system agreement with the airport operator and air navigation service provider at this point for your own legal protection. (Not at the last 50 airports I check audited, you don't.) So, if you kill someone when you fall off, expect to go to jail for manslaughter.
9. how long to you need to be stable for, ATC vectoring may well be too tight for the system to cope with. You guys are always calling "established" when you aren't locked on, tracking and happy. Just because something changes colour in the cockpit, does not mean that you are, it might mean that the machine is now in the mode where it is trying to!
10. power supply requirements are quite different and can lead to transient changes in the signal generated, as well as the lights going out!
11. Some ILS LOC signals allow for roll out guidance, but can be very wonky in the 100 foot area, expect a disconnect at any point. When was the last time that you practiced an autopilot disconnect in autoland configuration below DA? Try it at 70 feet in an aircraft with underslung engines and all that nice trim in. Yep, the 737-200 would be fun. Can you get a landing out of it, or are you going to go around at this point? Answers to your Head of Flight Training on a postcard please (OK, some airlines do it, but a few that I know do not!)
So, if you want to do it and not end up in jail, or without a job, then make sure that your planning department has done their work on the Airport PATC (if they even publish it, which they do not for CAT I facilities...) in AIP GEN AD2, they have seen the flight check (which will not go down that far if they have only been paid for a CAT I flight check, in some countries) and it is acceptable, if your insurance company approves it (if your flight operations department even thinks of that one), that the airport has been audit by your men under JAR OPS 1.220 and that the full infrastructure is available (does any airline actually did the full audit anymore, other than counting the fire engines, although I have done a few for a couple of nameless airlines), that ATC and the airport operator have integrated their safety management systems (if they are different organisations) and that your SMS is integrated with theirs (plus operational procedures etc) and so on. Once you have done all of that, and got permission from the airport and ATC insurance companies blah blah, then please, go ahead.
Actually, lots of airports in the US have this ability, but they have the FAA to think about it and approve it. Same in UK. Netherlands publishes some non-standard information about their ILS beams so residents can do it.
If you have any doubts about any element of the list above, which is not complete, and you do not have a specific company instruction listing the runways you may use and any other operational considerations, then I would suggest that you might like to land manually, for your own legal protection.
1. The beam needs to be good enough. There is no way that you have sufficient information in the cockpit to determine this. There is no legal requirement to publish the information about the "straightness" of the beams for a CAT I ILS.
2. Some very large airports to not protect the ILS GP anything like enough in visual conditions. If a 744 taxies in front of the GP, then in certain conditions, it can deflect the beam to 1 degree, which would make your approach fun. Hence some of the reasons for LVPs at airports.
3. The wrong holding points will be in use, hence potential interference.
4. Some idiot at the airport will have decided not to protect the instrument runway strip and have work going on there as the runway landings are visual. Australia especially bad at this. If you fall off, you could be in trouble.
5. Beam deflection from the aircraft ahead on approach (had a GP drop out with this, but very unusual) but LOC can go all over the place, as well as the deviation swing of LOC from the overflight.
6. The terrain may upset your radalt based calls. Hence, if you look in the UK Integrated AIP, you will find a special note about Manchester and CAT II operations onto Runway 06L, as an example. (too late for me to remember if it is an AIC or an AIS) but applies to C/D categories of approach speed but not A/B
7. The terrain may upset the automatics, it can be fun to watch them on autoland trials with downhill runways, having had an uphill approach, float, float, float ooops spool up go-around.
8. Do you have a safety management system agreement with the airport operator and air navigation service provider at this point for your own legal protection. (Not at the last 50 airports I check audited, you don't.) So, if you kill someone when you fall off, expect to go to jail for manslaughter.
9. how long to you need to be stable for, ATC vectoring may well be too tight for the system to cope with. You guys are always calling "established" when you aren't locked on, tracking and happy. Just because something changes colour in the cockpit, does not mean that you are, it might mean that the machine is now in the mode where it is trying to!
10. power supply requirements are quite different and can lead to transient changes in the signal generated, as well as the lights going out!
11. Some ILS LOC signals allow for roll out guidance, but can be very wonky in the 100 foot area, expect a disconnect at any point. When was the last time that you practiced an autopilot disconnect in autoland configuration below DA? Try it at 70 feet in an aircraft with underslung engines and all that nice trim in. Yep, the 737-200 would be fun. Can you get a landing out of it, or are you going to go around at this point? Answers to your Head of Flight Training on a postcard please (OK, some airlines do it, but a few that I know do not!)
So, if you want to do it and not end up in jail, or without a job, then make sure that your planning department has done their work on the Airport PATC (if they even publish it, which they do not for CAT I facilities...) in AIP GEN AD2, they have seen the flight check (which will not go down that far if they have only been paid for a CAT I flight check, in some countries) and it is acceptable, if your insurance company approves it (if your flight operations department even thinks of that one), that the airport has been audit by your men under JAR OPS 1.220 and that the full infrastructure is available (does any airline actually did the full audit anymore, other than counting the fire engines, although I have done a few for a couple of nameless airlines), that ATC and the airport operator have integrated their safety management systems (if they are different organisations) and that your SMS is integrated with theirs (plus operational procedures etc) and so on. Once you have done all of that, and got permission from the airport and ATC insurance companies blah blah, then please, go ahead.
Actually, lots of airports in the US have this ability, but they have the FAA to think about it and approve it. Same in UK. Netherlands publishes some non-standard information about their ILS beams so residents can do it.
If you have any doubts about any element of the list above, which is not complete, and you do not have a specific company instruction listing the runways you may use and any other operational considerations, then I would suggest that you might like to land manually, for your own legal protection.
