FAA Targets 2018 For GPS-Based Autoland Capability
 

"The FAA says airlines may be able to begin using ground-based augmentation systems (GBAS) for satellite-based Category 3 instrument landings that culminate in a 50-ft. decision height or an automatic landing by 2018, offering a lower-cost alternative to legacy ground-based instrument landing systems (ILS)."


FAA Targets 2018 For GPS-Based Autoland Capability

"Legacy"; the second most-abused word of the english language, after "like". :}

Same here Bloggs. When I first came across this 'legacy' nonsense I thought it was a reference to Legacy Airlines out of Indianapolis or Legacy Air out of Bangkok.

I've since worked out 'legacy' = 'real'.

We have done GBAS autoland trials a few years ago already. Very very smooth and reliable, til the end of the automatic rollout. And since there is no need for protected areas there is the possibility of increasing traffic flow in low vis conditions.

Would love to have it available if only the retrofit costs on airbii weren't that ridiculous.

Exactly. There are quite a few in operation around the world, not with Commercial ac but with Military ac.

What effect will this have on airport safeguarding for Lo Vis Ops?

Good, the more peer pressure that is put on UK to get gps approachs rolled out the better.

Cat I GLS Autoland
 

Some recent Boeing and Airbus models are equipped with GLS systems qualified for Category I and autoland, as a first step toward Cat III and, for that matter, as an additional opportunity to regularly exercise the autoland functions.

Cat I GLS can be flown at EWR and IAH and perhaps some others by now, but not sure if autoland is available in every case. The key prerequisite is installation of a qualified ground station (GBAS) - GAST C for Cat I and GAST D for Cat III (not yet in service). A key difference is increased signal integrity.

Cat III operations, of course, require more than airborne and navaid systems, they also require an runway/airport infrastructure, especially lights and the low visibility surface movement plan with associated markings, lights, procedures, etc. Nevertheless, as previously mentioned in this thread, the GBAS GAST D would be less expensive than the Cat III ILS installation, plus usable for all qualified runways in the vicinity not just one as with ILS.

UK doesn't have GPS Approaches??? really?

:ugh:

This is specifically Precision GPS approaches, not Non Precision.

not so you would notice.

I dont have enough have posts to post a link, I suggest one googles:

‘Not our finest hour’ admits CAA over GPS approaches'

WOW, back in 2015, the forward thinking FAA thought the airlines would be using GBAS CAT III autoland by 2018!!!!

oh wait, its 2019......

I found this rather humorous ICAO document on the subject. (humorous being the line item corrections and the year 2010)

https://www.icao.int/safety/airnavig...cat_ii_iii.pdf

Underfire,
Humour?? Lost on me, and if you are that the time lapse is "funny", this is little more than an illustration of how slowly bureaucracies grind away??
At least we are are now seeing the delayed GPSIII constellation going up.
Tootle pip!!

Probably should have stated sad instead of humorous...sarcastic humour? Put in context with CAT III autolands by 2018....

At least they moved the GBAS to MEL....who knows if it will be used...

Shakeup and reorg in Honeywell land did not help. Seems the CAT III cert program died.

I thought that they moved the GBAS from SYD to MEL...how could it be a 'default' for both?

No, they didn't move it. They installed a second GBAS in MEL. The GBAS in SYD is still there.

ahhh, okay...thanks

As I am certain you are all well aware, the real value of GBAS for suitably equipped aircraft -- IN AUSTRALIA --- is related to Australian "Roools" for alternates, with potentially substantial saving in fuel,carried, due to lower alternate criteria created--- for decades now, this was the driver in interest in GBAS.
In places like UK, GBAS produces no such benefit.
Always follow the money.
Tootle pip!!

Fear of GPS jamming, especially after Newark, has really kept it from being widely implemented.

In addition, after the whole MLS fiasco, airlines were reluctant to spent any money or time on a new fangled system.

More like "jamming by bureaucracy". It's a d@#n shame.