PPRuNe Forums - Airbus A-388 and Visual Flight Rules

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- Tech Log (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log-15/)

- - Airbus A-388 and Visual Flight Rules (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/499580-airbus-388-visual-flight-rules.html)

Airbus A-388 and Visual Flight Rules

Hello,
I just got a copy of the Federal Aviation Administration Notice N JO 7110.509 see:
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m.../N7110.582.pdf
It says at 5,a,2 - "Visual separation rules specified in FAA Order N JO 7110.65, Chapter 7, section 2, shall not be applied with respect to the A388."

Does this mean an Airbus A388 is not permitted to be operated under Visual Flight Rules and must be operated only under Instrument Flight Rules?

I operated every airliner I flew (Boeing 747-100, all the Boeing 707s and Boeing 727's) under Visual Flight Rules when appropriate and have not heard of a provision that requires specific aircraft to be only operated under Instrument Flight Rules.

Has any A388 pilot ever operated his aircraft under Visual Flight Rules?
I would appreciate it if an A388 pilot would answer my question.

Thanks!
Dick Siano
rsiano@mac. com

I read it that VFR separation rules shall not be applied, not that the aircraft mustn't be operated VFR ie some greater separation distance from other traffic must be applied by ATC.

This document applies to how ATC is to provide separation between aircraft. It is NOT a change to any FLIGHT rules. Simply stated, the document modifies an existing air traffic control policy regarding wake turbulence separation standards to be applied by air traffic control units with regard to "A388" type aircraft. Whether or under what circumstances one is authorized to operate these aircraft under Visual Flight Rules is a separate issue which is addressed by flight rules and company manuals.

Best,

westhawk

Here's the actual wording from FAA Order N JO 7110.65, Chapter 7, section 2

Quote:

7−2−1. VISUAL SEPARATION
Aircraft may be separated by visual means, as provided in this paragraph, when other approved separation is assured before and after the application of visual separation. To ensure that other separation will exist, consider aircraft performance, wake turbulence, closure rate, routes of flight, and known weather conditions. Reported weather conditions must allow the aircraft to remain within sight until other separation exists. Do not apply visual separation between successive departures when departure routes and/or aircraft performance preclude maintaining separation....

The notice you got effectively rewrites that paragraph to read:

Quote:

7−2−1. VISUAL SEPARATION
Aircraft may be separated by visual means, except in cases involving the A388, as provided in this paragraph, when other approved separation is assured before and after the application of visual separation. To ensure that other separation will exist, consider aircraft performance, wake turbulence, closure rate, routes of flight, and known weather conditions. Reported weather conditions must allow the aircraft to remain within sight until other separation exists. Do not apply visual separation between successive departures when departure routes and/or aircraft performance preclude maintaining separation....

I.E., CONTROLLERS cannot request that pilots maintain visual separation if an A388 is involved. No "Traffic, 3 o'clock, 3 miles, converging, A388, do you have it in sight? Maintain visual separation."

The pilots can fly visually, but the controllers need to do the separating via radar and commands for turns or altitude/speed adjustments. Could be because of exceptional wake turbulence, or because the unusual size of the A388 makes judging separation visually a tricky proposition.