having this metar,I will try to land on rwy 19 (not infriging the minimums), because rvr 400 is modifying let say in a few minutes ,or it could occur a SPECI with a rvr19/ 550 in right time...btw I had a succesfull landing CAT II with rvr 225m (actually it was 180m...) ATR-42 !(I had passed the OM, so I just tried )

they way I see it, the answer is maybe. depends on the approach category of the a/c
JAR-OPS1 says for (catA)
400' and 1500m looking at those numbers in theory it could be done. With my last sim ride setting the wx on the limits you can't see jack sh$#.
for anything other than catA a/c this would be illegal

Were I a naughty chap I might be tempted to say 'visual' at 1100' and get on with it...............:)

Thought I'd revive this one as I've come across some additional information whilst studying.

Under the "Acceptable Means of Compliance and Interprative Explanatory Material (AMC/IEM)" associated with JAR-OPS, it states as follows:

IEM to Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 1.430, paragraph (f) Visual Manoeuvring (circling)

1 The purpose of this IEM is to provide operators with supplemental information regarding the application of aerodrome operating minima in relation to circling approaches.

2 Conduct of flight - General
2.1 For these procedures, the applicable visibility is the meteorological visibility (VIS). So Approach ban is not applicable?
2.2 The MDA/H and OCA/H minimums included in the procedure are related to aerodrome elevation.

3 Missed approach
3.1 If the decision to carry out a missed approach is taken when the aircraft is positioned on the approach axis (track) defined by radio-navigation aids, the published missed approach procedure must be followed. If visual reference is lost while circling to land from an instrument approach, the missed approach specified for that particular instrument approach must be followed. It is expected that the pilot will make an initial climbing turn toward the landing runway and overhead the aerodrome where he will establish the
aeroplane in a climb on the missed approach track. Inasmuch as the circling manoeuvre may be accomplished in more than one direction, different patterns will be required to establish the aeroplane on the prescribed missed approach course depending on its position at the time visual reference is lost unless otherwise prescribed.
3.2 If the instrument approach procedure is carried out with the aid of an ILS, the Missed Approach Point (MAPt) associated with an ILS procedure without glide path (GP out procedure) should be taken in account.

4 Instrument approach followed by visual manoeuvring (circling) without prescribed tracks
4.1 Before visual reference is established, but not below MDA/H - The flight should follow the corresponding instrument approach procedure. Again -carry on down the ILS to Circling minima?
4.2 At the beginning of the level flight phase at or above the MDA/H - From the beginning of the level flight phase, the instrument approach track determined by radio navigation aids should be maintained until:
a. The pilot estimates that, in all probability, visual contact with the runway or runway environment will be maintained during the entire procedure;
b. The pilot estimates that his aircraft is within the circling area before commencing circling; and
c. The pilot is able to determine his aircraft’s position in relation to the runway with the aid of the external references.
4.3 If the conditions in paragraph 4.2 above are not met by the MAPt, a missed approach must be carried out in accordance with the instrument approach procedure.
4.4 After the aeroplane has left the track of the corresponding instrument approach procedure, the flight phase outbound from the runway should be limited to the distance which is required to align the aeroplane for the final approach. Flight manoeuvres should be conducted within the circling area and in such way that visual contact with the runway or runway environment is maintained at all times.
4.5 Flight manoeuvres should be carried out at an altitude/height which is not less than the circling minimum descent/altitude height (MDA/H).
4.6 Descent below MDA/H should not be initiated until the threshold of the runway to be used has been identified and the aeroplane is in a position to continue with a normal rate of descent and land within the touchdown zone.

So I think it would be acceptable to ignore the approach ban - because the applicable minima is the met viz not the touchdown RVR.

Regards

A4

Well done A4, I think you've cracked it. Is the AMC/IEM online somewhere?

Yes. :}

It took a lot of searching..... and I can't remember where I found it. In essence you need to look for JAR-OPS 1 Section 2 not JAR-OPS 2 which is Helicopters. Same applies for JAR-FCL, except it is not available as a single document.

I need to get out more......... :uhoh:

A4

Approach Ban.
 

How do you interpret Approach ban in your neck of the woods? In Japan it is a company imposed criteria but, it seems to me that in other parts of the world it is instigated by ATC.

No CS, it is instigated by regulation. If you intend to perform an approach and the touchdown RVR is below the required minima, you are prohibited from making an approach beyond the OM/4d/1000' agl point. If you do then ATC have a duty to report you to the required authority so that "corrective adjustment" can be "applied" :}

A4

Bookworm..... check your PM's

A4

I caught this thread late, nice research indeed A4.

I need one thing clarified though... A few posters referred to 800m RVR for circling mininma. But my company ops say visual approach min is 800m RVR and visual MANOEUVRING i.e. circling min is 2400m VIS for a Class C aircraft. I would assume those minima are straight out of JAR minima. Am I missing something?

thx

P

I understand the 2400m is the minimum in flight vis and the 800 is the controlling RVR. This is why the question is such a 'corker' as the vis is (probably) fine for the intended circle and landing - if you can get to it legally:).

Do you have a reference for the 800m RVR being applicable to a circling approach? Looking at Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 1.430, I can only find the reference for 2400m as being the minimum VIS for a circling approach. 800m RVR is only quoted in reference to a visual approach (not circling).

Just to clear any confusion, I am referring to statements in this thread such as the following, from NW1:

800m RVR just does not seem to be relevant to being allowed to carry on with a circling approach (only straight in visual would be relevant).

Not that I don't believe you :E But you know more than most that the name of the game is being able to quote exact references...

P

Perma - its a good question! Working from JAR-OPS 1.430,App 1 Table 8 we have:

Lowest met vis for circling (Cat C) 2400m which I have always understood to be 'in-flight vis'

Minimum RVR (my bold) for a 'visual approach' 800m.

My reading is that I can circle with 2400m MET VIS (should I be so bold:)) but could not do so if the RVR was <800m. It is a matter of interpretation I guess and not an area in which I would willingly be 'grobbling about'. I take your point about JAR-OPS's wording regarding 'straight-in' approaches.

EG shallow fog bank on the runway, 10k+ vis above in the 'circuit', runway in sight all the way round the 'circuit' but 700m RVR, no circling or 'visual approach'.

That's the way I see it but I'm sure someone knows real answer.:)

Gimmesumvalium,

How lucky you are and what enlightened Ops Management! In my opinion, circling approaches were designed in the days of smaller and slower aircraft when the approach aids were not too plentiful either.

I believe circling approaches are entirely inappropriate for medium to large aircraft, even modern ones with Map etc which does help SA. In particular, I believe circling approaches at night belong to the lunatic fringe of aviation and should not be allowed by ICAO. That's not what the fare-paying public expects in terms of safe transportation.

By the way, the Approach Ban as now constituted, only prevents the cowboy from commencing the approach (OM/Equiv position etc). If he gets an RVR way below the minimum for the approach after he's passed the marker, the cowboy can continue to land in zero zero if he likes. In the UK he will be reported but when the CAA asks the inevitable questions later, all the two pilots have to do is swear on a stack of bibles/korans that they had adequate visual reference and there's nothing the feds can do about it (except watch this outfit for future reference of course). Unfortunately when the original UK App Ban was changed, the result was that it merely prevented the cowboys from commencing the approach.

This has been a very interesting thread to read through and well done to A4 for digging the answer out of AMC and IEM. Circling is currently a hot topic in the company I work for and it is often included in sim checks.

I can't agree with you, SIDSTAR, and I think your language is a tad emotive. What would you do if the destination had published instrument approaches to one end only of a single runway and a 20-25 kt wind favouring the other end? Divert? Cancel the service? Besides, I doubt very much if many of the fare-paying public have the slightest clue what a circling approach is.

Well, I must be one of those lunatics! Certain Airports only have Circling approaches due to terrain eg Funchal, Madeira. The excellent training that I've received to carry out these approaches by both day & NIGHT in limiting weather conditions into Funchal leaves me in no doubt whatsover as to the safety of this type of approach. Also it's the best flying I've done in years :D