Dest alt going below planning minima?
 

Assuming EU-ops. You are en route to your destination when your destination alternate airport drops below planning minima but remains above operational minima. From a legal perspective can you still use it as destination alternate or do you need to pick another destination alternate. My opinion is that you can still use it as planning minima apply only in the planning stage. But I need documentation and reference to where I can find it in writing. Not just personal opinions.

Thanks!

EUOPS 1.340 (b)

Dest alt going below planning minima?
 

Thanks, anyone able to decode the first line concerning revised flight plan and inflight replanning? Does it mean that you sometimes can use use plate minima for destination alternate inflight? I think it's a common conception that planning minima don't apply flight.

If landing isn't assured at your alternate (I.e. weather below planning minima) then you need to commit to your destination (if possible), or else find a new alternate.

No, it refers to applicable planning minima, which is always 'one up' for alternates.

It's pretty logical if you think about it. If you can't land at your destination there's a good chance you are going to end up at your alternate with just over 30 mins fuel so the last thing you want to find is that some truck has driven into the localiser aerial. The only other approach available is an SRA but the weather is below that minima..... Not a nice place to be!

You have to choose an airport above alternate planning minima ("wx better than good enough") to nominate it as a destination alternate.

Once airborne, that destination alternate should be above "good enough minima" or published minima, for you to count on it. Therefore, once airborne you can keept it as the alternate as long as you can land on it according to the plate minima.

But: if you make an inflight replanning to another airport any alternate for taht airport must meet planning minima, bacause you are in planning stage again.

Dest alt going below planning minima?
 

Microburst, can you back up your claim with any evidence? It seems to be a common misconception that you can disregard your planning minima in flight. You are right about your last statement I'm sure but that doesn't mean you can just disregard your planning minima. I am talking about the case where you are en route and you get information that your dest alt goes below planning minima before TOD.

I almost think it is a typo in the EU OPS 1.340 (b). In the old JAR OPS it was applicable aerodrome operating minima. Now it says planning applicable aerodrome operating minima which doesnt make sense. It is either planning minima as in (a) or applicable aerodrome operating minima...

Microburst got it absolutely right:

Being at the dispatch room: Planning minima for the alternate apply.

Once you are airborne and the minima fall below the planning minima for the alternate, you are still good to use it and fly to it if necessary - the actual landing minima apply at that stage.

But if you decide to change alternates in flight, than you have to apply the planning minima again, as you are doing an inflight re-planning.

This is what's in our manuals (EU carrier). Will try to find the reference in the EU-OPS manuals later, but am heading off to work now.

- save yourself the bother - see post #2. Yes it does seem wrong, but there it is. Your manuals appear to be wrong.

Dest alt going below planning minima?
 

Thanks for good inputs. It's not hard to understand that you need to apply planning minima for planning in the air as well as on the ground. That's clear to me now thanks. But it's harder and still to be proven that you can disregard those minima once airborne. Exactly which part of EU-Ops allows you to do that?

Don't worry about it, Pres - stick to your own Ops manual - if it is wrong it is the regulator's fault.

Dest alt going below planning minima?
 

Well there is no help on this in my ops manuals. And it would be nice to know where we stand legally. The reason I'm asking is that it happened to me the other day. Our dest alt went below planned minima and we nominated a new alternate. But I was not sure if it was really necessary. Good practice indeed but perhaps not always an option.

Out of interest, pres, does your Ops Manual specify and require the use of the the EUOPS 'Planning Minima' (1.297 I think), or does it just imply the use of AOM?

I appreciate this is about legality, but you then mentioned it happened in reality and a choice had to be made. Legal or not "common sense rules, OK". Surely, when-ever you are inbound to a dodgy wx. destination you'll have a cast-iron alternate, or 2, up your sleeve. It's not the legality of the matter about the alternate, it is about getting on the ground, preferably on some suitable tarmac, still with some fuel in the tanks, and at a place where more fuel is available. Planning is before the event, airmanship is in the execution of the event.

Looks like someone noticed the typo, Airporn.

COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 965/2012 of 5 October 2012

CAT.OP.MPA.245 Meteorological conditions — all aircraft
(a) On IFR flights the commander shall only:
(1) commence take-off; or
(2) continue beyond the point from which a revised ATS flight plan applies in the event of in-flight replanning, when information is available indicating that the expected weather conditions, at the time of arrival, at the destination and/or required alternate aerodrome(s) are at or above the planning minima.
(b) On IFR flights, the commander shall only continue towards the planned destination aerodrome when the latest information available indicates that, at the expected time of arrival, the weather conditions at the destination, or at least one destination alternate aerodrome, are at or above the applicable aerodrome operating minima.

5th of october... Fresh one

Amazing, bookworm- the date on that pdf is 25/10/12 - 'news' does not get much more up-to-date than that:ok:

Oh it's better than that BOAC. In Article 10

"It shall apply from 28 October 2012."

i.e. midnight tonight. You have been warned... ;)

(There is a 2 year derogation period, which I imagine every state will take advantage of.)

Fantastic! You must win the PPRune prize for the most current, if not prescient news-flash:)