CAT II in true
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 4,704
Likes: 589
From: 500 miles from Chaikhosi, Yogistan
CAT II in true
I'm pretty sure that this would be a hypothetical question, but flicking through the Airbus FCOM I notice that those aircraft that have Polar Nav mods fitted, that landing in CAT II when in TRUE is prohibited.
I don't have access to the Boeing manuals - out of curiosity is it the same for them? 787/777/767 etc?
Cheers
I don't have access to the Boeing manuals - out of curiosity is it the same for them? 787/777/767 etc?
Cheers
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,118
Likes: 140
From: overthere
No approval for auto rollout in any type that I am aware of, as runway heading is used in flare mode for runway alignment on touchdown. Can't happen when in true . You need the runway heading to be correctly aligned with the aircraft direction of travel down the LLZ .
Joined: Nov 1999
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 3,147
Likes: 741
From: UK
Without diving into the manuals I am not sure if that would work in those parts of the world with large magnetic variations. CAT ll has no roll-out tracking, so if it just tracked the LOC down to minima it might work, or would it throw up conflict alerts?
(Sorry don, just realised you’ve answered that question)
(Sorry don, just realised you’ve answered that question)
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 4,704
Likes: 589
From: 500 miles from Chaikhosi, Yogistan
Probably none Aterpster (which I why I said hypothetical!).
Thanks for the info above dpmo, but hypothetically, what about a CAT II landing without autoland?
Thanks for the info above dpmo, but hypothetically, what about a CAT II landing without autoland?
Guest
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
From: On the Beach
They have several Runway 8 true ILS charts, with the lower minimums requiring a climb gradient missed approach. But, none get as low as 200 HAT (289 and 5/8), which tells me the environment and/or facilities can't support CAT II or III.
