|
No FLARE during CAT3
What should we do under real CAT3:
- go around or - AP off and manual flare if visual contact established? Any paper reference please |
You don't say which aircraft type you are refering to, but generally speaking, your going to make contact with the runway in anycase!
|
Boroda
Take a look at the FCOM, i think Vol 4 Failures and associated actions below 1000ft for Cat III approach, it gives the option on no "Flare" at 30 feet to either disengage and manual landing or a go around, firstly it is quite a subtle failure often going unnoticed, secondly trying to do a manual landing from this point is quite tricky bearing in mind you only have around 3 seconds before impact. MF |
You only gonna make RWY contact below the infamous MAH (minimum alert height). I agree it's type specific.
Dani |
A320, autoflare should be at 40 feet. CAT3A minima - 50 feet.
It is known that for CAT3 autoland is mandatory. Because in comparence with CAT2 we do not need to have visual contact for manul landing, the only thing we need - we are sure over touchdown zone. If we are sure at 50 feet, but no flare at 40, can I make manual landing? Actually I was punished by TRE at simulator refresh for my manual landing, reason - autoland is mandatory. |
If this were to happen in a boeing, couldn't you just give the yoke a tug, or are the autopilot 'motors' too powerful??
|
A couple of year ago, the scenario of NO FLARE was standard during the training sessions on the A320. The only legal option - according to our SOPs - was a go-around. A manual landing during a LVO approach was only allowed with a CAT2 minimum, and the autopilot had to be disconnected latest at 80' AGL.
But that was changed with the introduction of the 0'-75m minimum. Then the only reason for a go-around below Alert Height was an ATC call or the AUTOLAND LIGHT. So the scenario of NO FLARE was not trained anymore during the sim sessions. Unfortunately I cannot remeber whether NO FLARE would trigger the AUTOLAND LIGHT. On the MD11 a no flare would be reason for a go-around during a CAT3 approach. Manual landings are not allowed with CAT3 minimums on the MD11. Regards, DBate |
Technically to give a tug & make a landing on Airbbus - no big deal. The problem is in my rights to do it.
|
Thanks,
I have found it in FCOM 4 - if no flare at 30 feet and sufficient visual contact - AP off and comlete manual landing. So it is only technical requirement before approach. |
Our procedure....on an AWOPs approach, below DH....Autopilot disconnect.....GO AROUND. It is introduced in simulator checks to test whether the candidate will Go Around. It is a must do. If you have no flare, don't fight the A/P in a flare on a Cat 2 or 3 landing! Disengage and GTH out of there!
B737/B757 |
Rainboe,
Out of interest what aircraft are you referring to? |
I have found it in FCOM 4 - if no flare at 30 feet and sufficient visual contact - AP off and comlete manual landing. Usually PIC is PF during a CAT3 approach. The PNF would make the callout NO FLARE at wich altitude probably? I guess at around 30'. By the time the PF realises what has happened, disconnects the AP and flares for landing, you will already hit the runway in a not very favorable attitude. |
Many years ago we looked at autopilot disconnect below 50 ft. The only guaranteed successful outcomes were when a ga was carried out. Attempts to land often resulted in a high speed runway excursion due to lack of visual cues. Agreed the ga will result in runway contact, but it will only be a brief touch.
|
Our QRH says (abbreviated) for Airbus A320 series:
FAILURES BELOW 1000FT Below 1000ft AAL the occurrence of any of the failures listed below necessitates a go-around, unless visual reference has already been acquired and can be maintained, and RVR is CAT 1 or better. ...... Unless visual reference is sufficient to disengage autopilot and complete manual landing, GO-AROUND in the event of: ....No FLARE mode at 30R In essence, IMHO, on an Autoland LVP approach, "any" event that requires discussion or decision is best handled by a GA. Even if you touch down in the GA that is a known / trained for process ;) NoD |
Go Around...
Not sure what any others aircraft require, but the 777 is definitely, 'Go Around' and with good reason.
Have any of you actually done a CAT IIIb at limits? Virtually impossible to determine when/where to flare during a maneuver like that. |
I can't believe anybody would want to press ahead with a landing, possibly even attempting to override the autopilot, and plant it on the ground to attempt to land! Probably dropping bits off the aeroplane and bending bits that shouldn't be bent! Crazy! get the H out of there!
And don't fly another Cat3 approach until you understand what you are doing! |
744: Let it land. Do NOT disconnect the autopilot or autothrottles.
|
Out of our EU-OPS manual for 737 (mixed classic/NG operation):
RHS shall closely monitor all flight instruments throughout the landing, paying special attention to the FMA "FLARE" and "RETARD" annunciations. RHS shall call "NO FLARE" if "FLARE" is not annunciated. RHS shall call "NO RETARD" if "RETARD" is not annunciated. Crew actions in case of autopilot failure at or below decision height: • For operations to actual RVR values less than 300m, a go-around is assumed in the event of an autopilot failure at or below DH. • This means that a go-around is the normal action. • However the wording recognises that there may be circumstances where the safest action is to continue the landing. Such circumstances include the height at which the failure occurs, the actual Visual references, and other malfunctions. This would typically apply to the late stages of the flare. • In conclusion it is not forbidden to continue the approach and complete the landing when the Commander or the pilot to whom the conduct of the flight has been delegated, determines that this is the safest course of action. |
For the 757/767, a "NO FLARE" annunciation is an automatic go-around. As has been mentioned, you will most likely touch down during the go-around, but the pitch up maneuver will insure a safe attitude at touchdown. Further, the power will be coming up, and there will be a positive climb almost immediately.
The real threat, if one should attempt a manual landing, is a bounced landing. The bounced landing recovery procedure would be problematic, to say the least. A go-around from the top of the bounce is probably not where you want to be, either. All things considered, a manual landing would be acceptable ONLY is the visual references were adequate for a flare and touchdown, which would be rather more than the visual references required for fail-passive CAT III minima. Probably wise to make this assessment a bit before the point at which you are expecting a FLARE annunciation. Otherwise, a simple flick of the thumb should do the trick. |
L1011 (the first widebody to be CATIII fail/operational approved, straight from the factory:ok:)
Manual flare, without disconnecting the autopilots. IE: CWS in pitch mode with flare not captured. Works like a charm. No need to GA. Fully approved. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:34. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.