Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

GoAround requirements for CAT II

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

GoAround requirements for CAT II

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 28th February 2018 | 11:46
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
From: Lat N55
GoAround requirements for CAT II

Hello everybody!
We have a range of go-around speeds (1.23-1.41 Vs) for normal approach (CAT I and others). Is it applicable for CAT II?
The entries are the same but the approach type.
Is it software or flight limitation?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
IMG_0465.jpg (699.1 KB, 137 views)
File Type: jpg
IMG_0467.jpg (683.0 KB, 133 views)
Anvaldra is offline  
Reply
Old 28th February 2018 | 12:31
  #2 (permalink)  
5 Anniversary
 
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,013
Likes: 15
From: Isla Grande
One is AUTOLAND, one is manual.
gearlever is offline  
Reply
Old 28th February 2018 | 15:11
  #3 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
From: Lat N55
My fault but it doesn't matter, it increases OLD only
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
IMG_0469.jpg (662.6 KB, 118 views)
Anvaldra is offline  
Reply
Old 2nd March 2018 | 13:29
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
From: EU
You have different landing weights in your calculations as I can see ......
Flyer007 is offline  
Reply
Old 2nd March 2018 | 19:57
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
From: Lat N55
The landing weight is 61000 kg for both cases. The question is why the performance MLWs are different for same conditions and other entries
Anvaldra is offline  
Reply
Old 2nd March 2018 | 21:27
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 344
Likes: 1
From: Germany
my only guess would be for some odd reason go-around gradient is calculated for an earlier go-around in one case because CATII means very low level go-around.

on the other hand it does not make sense because a bounced landing also means go-around.
so below 200ft or so you are committed to land
wiedehopf is offline  
Reply
Old 4th March 2018 | 15:09
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
From: HK
Presumably because the GA, for the calculations not CAT2, assume a GA at DA for normal Cat 1 approach (presumably 200') and you would therefore make the 5% gradient for the GA.
In the CAT 2 case the GA from the CAT 2 DH (of presumably about 100' RA) the aircraft will not make the 5% GA gradient, so a lighter weight is required to make the 5%.
iceman50 is offline  
Reply
Old 4th March 2018 | 16:49
  #8 (permalink)  
50 Countries Visited
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 30
From: Texas
Originally Posted by wiedehopf
my only guess would be for some odd reason go-around gradient is calculated for an earlier go-around in one case because CATII means very low level go-around.

on the other hand it does not make sense because a bounced landing also means go-around.
so below 200ft or so you are committed to land
Missed approach numbers are based on the approach climb limit with an engine inop from the DH. Landing climb limit numbers are all engine from 50 feet. So you're committed to land from 50 feet.

I still don't see where the OP gets the 5% grade.
MarkerInbound is offline  
Reply
Old 4th March 2018 | 18:17
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 344
Likes: 1
From: Germany
Originally Posted by MarkerInbound
Missed approach numbers are based on the approach climb limit with an engine inop from the DH. Landing climb limit numbers are all engine from 50 feet. So you're committed to land from 50 feet.

I still don't see where the OP gets the 5% grade.
it's only for high waves around incheon

(and thanks for a qualified answer i just guessed because no one else answered)
wiedehopf is offline  
Reply
Old 5th March 2018 | 02:43
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
From: HK
So you're committed to land from 50 feet.
Committed??? You are never committed!

Presumably the 5% will be from the approach chart for the GA.
iceman50 is offline  
Reply
Old 5th March 2018 | 05:35
  #11 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
From: Lat N55
Originally Posted by iceman50
Presumably because the GA, for the calculations not CAT2, assume a GA at DA for normal Cat 1 approach (presumably 200') and you would therefore make the 5% gradient for the GA.
In the CAT 2 case the GA from the CAT 2 DH (of presumably about 100' RA) the aircraft will not make the 5% GA gradient, so a lighter weight is required to make the 5%.
If such reasoning is followed, the CAT III operation would restrict our LW till unacceptable value.
FlySmart doesn't have an option to insert CAT III, so i don't think if the manufacturer wouldn't take it into consideration
Anvaldra is offline  
Reply
Old 5th March 2018 | 19:35
  #12 (permalink)  
50 Countries Visited
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 30
From: Texas
The approach plate has a 4% to 3000 requirement but the MSA in the quadrant the miss takes you to is only 2300.
MarkerInbound is offline  
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.