CAT III ILS mins

[BigIron]

. Posted it under commercial as the Navy doesn't use these mins. Maybe interesting to future aviators. Remember your 6Ts.

 

[PropStop]

Neat! Wonder what kind of plane that was.

 

[Herc_Dude]

Looks like typical Portland wx...

 

[plc67]

Looks more like a CATII or higher approach rather than a CATIII. You only see the centerline lights briefly before you touchdown in the CATIII approaches I've done.

 

[HAL Pilot]

Looks more like a CATII or higher approach rather than a CATIII. You only see the centerline lights briefly before you touchdown in the CATIII approaches I've done.

Heck that might even have been a CAT I with all that approach lighting.

CAT III autoland in a DC-10....2 or 3 centerline lights max as you get the flare annunciation.

 

[PropStop]

CAT III autoland in a DC-10....2 or 3 centerline lights max as you get the flare annunciation.

Does it flare for you or do you have to flare when it tells you? Is your power on at that point or are you idle?

 

[nittany03]

Still impressive. Notice you can see the wake left by the preceding traffic in the clouds before the jet goes into them. And it hits the same exact spot. Pretty cool.

 

[HAL Pilot]

Does it flare for you or do you have to flare when it tells you? Is your power on at that point or are you idle?

If all is working perfectly, it flares itself, de-crabs (for crosswind) to track the centerline as it rolls on and the autothrottles get the power to idle. The pilot only has to work the reverse thrust and brakes (DC-10 autobrakes sucked).

 

[BigIron]

Looks more like a CATII or higher approach rather than a CATIII. You only see the centerline lights briefly before you touchdown in the CATIII approaches I've done.

It might be. Youtube is full of liars (and malcontents). Either way, a link to the airport and available approaches.

 

[FelixTheGreat]

Looks more like a CATII or higher approach rather than a CATIII. You only see the centerline lights briefly before you touchdown in the CATIII approaches I've done.

That is right. A CATIII approach has 0/0 minimums. I have always thought it was weird to think all that was involved with a 0/0 approach. Technically, you wouldn't be able to see where you are taxiing so the airplane would have to have some means of taxiing off the runway and to the gate all by itself.

 

[plc67]

CATIIIb approaches require no ceiling and 600 foot RVR. You don't have a decision height, you have an alert height. At 100 feet above the runway(alert height) our company SOM states that the support pilot calls Alert Height and the Flying Pilot responds CATIII, cleared to land. The airplane lands itself,brakes itself but you provide the thrust reverse. You then have to disconnect the autopilot or it won't let you leave the runway. In the 600 RVR range you have minimum visual cues but you can see to taxi.
At LAX a few months ago it was 300 RVR on the North Complex, below takeoff minimums, and I had to taxi to the South Complex where it was 6000(not a missprint) RVR and had to go quite slowly because we were in a very degraded visual cue environment.
I'm with HAL, I think that could be CATI. I've done a couple of CATIIs to PDX and definitely didn't see that much approach lighting.

 

[Single Seat]

That is right. A CATIII approach has 0/0 minimums. I have always thought it was weird to think all that was involved with a 0/0 approach. Technically, you wouldn't be able to see where you are taxiing so the airplane would have to have some means of taxiing off the runway and to the gate all by itself.

Wow, thanks for explaining that to all the winged pilots and airline guys above. No all CAT III approaches are 0/0 either.

 

[FrankTheTank]

600 RVR over here..

Boeing 727, 50 ft alert height / Airbus-MDs-DC10, 100 ft alert height..

However, given certain conditions, the MDs/DC-10 can go down to 300 RVR... TDZ, MID and RO RVR have to be working and certain approach lights as well (HIRL, TDZ, CL, ALSF-1 or 2 or foreign equivalent). Also noted in the FOM and I quote "VISUAL REFERENCE NOT REQ TO LAND"

As a side note Cat3b says the same quote but Cat3a says "VISUAL REFERENCE REQUIRED TO LAND"... :icon_wink

We never use ceilings for mins except for alternate planning... (And my understanding is that PAX airlines don't even require an alternate, but us box haulers do.. Things that make you go hmmm.... But I could be wrong)
1600 RVR = 1/4 mile
2400 RVR = 1/2 mile
4000 RVR = 3/4 mile

 

[whitesoxnation]

Anyone have any experience with the flip down HUDs with the FLIR that they have in the Gulfstreams?

Are there even any mins if you have that kind of equipment?

 

[SteveG75]

Bit of a threadjack here:

One day at Whidbey, the fog rolled in. Due to a sister squadron aircraft taking a field arrestment, we had to hold overhead till it they cleared the runway. Just for some background info: Bingo to McChord AFB (primary divert) was 3.3. Bingo to Comox CAFB (secondary divert) was 4.0.

We asked for a Mode II ACLS (200-1/2 mins) to Rwy 25. No coupled Mode I approachs for the mighty war pig. First pass, 5.0 on gas, got down to 200 feet and couldn't see a thing. Took our own waveoff. On the downwind, I asked Approach if the runway lights were on and turned up(this was about 1400 or so). Got the classic "wait one" reply , followed shortly by the call, "Tower says the lights are on now."

As we headed downwind, the backseat ECMO's check the weather at the diverts with metro. Wx at McChord AFB was 100-1/4. Comox was VMC.

We rolled onto final with 4.2 or so. If we didn't land this pass, we were heading to Canada. Pilot is flying the needles and I am looking for anything at all that I can see from the ECMO1 seat. At 200' AGL, I see the rabbit lights (flashing approach sequencers). No runway end lights, no edge lights. Still, rabbit lights count as "runway environment in sight".

We landed with 4.0 on gas (our bingo to Comox). For those unfamiliar with Whidbey, you get off runway 25 down by the tower and our line was right next to the tower as well. Tower and ground never saw us as we taxied clear of the duty and parked.