Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Some Questions About Full Autoland  
User currently offlineKimon From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 4904 times:

Anyone know which aircraft have this capability?
Why is it not standard?

18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSwiftski From Australia, joined Dec 2006, 2701 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4882 times:



Quoting Kimon (Thread starter):
Why is it not standard?

Example: Autoland is not available in Australia.


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 16975 posts, RR: 67
Reply 2, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 4870 times:

My guess is that it is not standard since:
1. It costs quite a bit for an operator to maintain the ability. Pilots and aircraft need to be continually certified.
2. Weather conditions requiring full autoland are not common enough to warrant the expenditure.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9523 posts, RR: 42
Reply 3, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 4859 times:



Quoting Swiftski (Reply 1):
Example: Autoland is not available in Australia.

Doesn't it depend on the conditions? E.g. on a clear, still day, can't an autoland be conducted for currency?


User currently offlineCobra27 From Slovenia, joined May 2001, 1008 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 4846 times:



Quoting Swiftski (Reply 1):

Example: Autoland is not available in Australia.

You don't have any cat 2,3 airports? What if you encounter really bad weather, altought in australia?


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 16975 posts, RR: 67
Reply 5, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 4839 times:

If they encounter really bad weather the plan is probably to wait until it clears. Strange as it may sounds, that option may be cheaper than the alternative.


"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineMandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6751 posts, RR: 76
Reply 6, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 4819 times:



Quoting Cobra27 (Reply 4):
You don't have any cat 2,3 airports? What if you encounter really bad weather, altought in australia?

Same in Indonesia, we have no CAT 2/3 ILS at any airport in the country. and some still only have VORDMEs, or NDB only, and some has them but no published approach procedures.
When weather gets bad, we simply just wait. It's now monsoon season, a lot of the times, airports only get down to 2000m visibility, which means an ILS Cat 1 is enough (down to 1000m viz and/or 200ft ceiling). Some airports would be better off with Cat 2 ILS capability, but the costs aren't justified, there are simply barely any day where the airport has to close for more than 3hrs, even the worst here at the main airport (Jakarta) we've only had 1 day since it's opening where the airport is closed for more than 3-6hrs, it was an exceptional day... so why do we need Cat 3 ILS????

For Australia, again, I think it's only Cat 1 ILSes.

Quoting David L (Reply 3):
Doesn't it depend on the conditions? E.g. on a clear, still day, can't an autoland be conducted for currency?

Correct me if I'm wrong (it's been a while since I read these up), but you are allowed to conduct autoland practice (on a revenue flight) on a Cat 1 ILS when:
- The weather minimas allow for standard cat 1 ILS approach.
- Approved ILS approaches only (with protected glideslope transmitter area, adequate threshold clearing height, etc)
- ATC must be notified (so that no one crosses the damn runway between you and the glide slope transmitters)...
- Deviations in the ILS approach conducted to Cat 3 limits.
- Crew must be Low Vis Ops trained and current.
- Aircraft must still be current on the Autoland.

If anyone has the details other than relying on my rusty braincells, do post it...  biggrin 



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently offlineLongHauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4877 posts, RR: 43
Reply 7, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 4777 times:



Quoting Mandala499 (Reply 6):
Correct me if I'm wrong (it's been a while since I read these up), but you are allowed to conduct autoland practice (on a revenue flight) on a Cat 1 ILS when:
- The weather minimas allow for standard cat 1 ILS approach.

That's right, an autoland may be performed on any Cat1 ILS, to Cat 1 minima, with the caveat that one may have to disconnect and take over between 200' and landing.

All of our aircraft are autoland equipped except the EMJs, (which are capable, we just didn't "buy that option"). In all my years flying autoland, starting with the A300B4-203, I have never had to take over.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 8, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4727 times:



Quoting Kimon (Thread starter):
Why is it not standard?

1) It's expensive to design, build, and maintain.
2) You require specially trained and certified crews to use it.
3) Many many airports don't have the ground infrastructure to support it so, depending on your routes, it may have no value.

Tom.


User currently offlineVoar From Canada, joined Jul 2008, 95 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 4720 times:



Quoting LongHauler (Reply 7):
All of our aircraft are autoland equipped except the EMJs, (which are capable, we just didn't "buy that option")

Just an addition to that, The EMJs are certified for autoland (when equipped) under any weather conditions without restrictons, I believe they are the first if not only aircraft to do so (somebody correct me if I'm wrong).


User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4684 times:

Countries do not specify autoland, aircraft do....in their specification.
Therefore, the statement that 'autoland is not available in Austraila'...is rubbish.
I've done many autolands in Australia, with L1011 equipment.
Fully approved.


User currently offlineSwiftski From Australia, joined Dec 2006, 2701 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4672 times:



Quoting David L (Reply 3):
Doesn't it depend on the conditions? E.g. on a clear, still day, can't an autoland be conducted for currency?



Quoting Cobra27 (Reply 4):
You don't have any cat 2,3 airports? What if you encounter really bad weather, altought in australia?

Refer to the SYD duststorm a couple of months ago. Diversions were required.

CAT I ILS is not Autoland approved. You can fly an autocoupled approach - a/c will capture the ILS but has to be disengaged for a manual landing. Per my manuals, CAT I is 550m and 200ft. CAT II is 300m and 100ft. In Australia there are only CAT I and CAT II ILS. Example; SYD is CAT I MEL is RWY 27 and RWY 26 are CAT II. A full (blind) Autoland (0m, 0ft) requires a CAT IIIc ILS with rollout guidance and ground radar.

There is nothing higher than a CAT II ILS in Australia.

Quoting 411A (Reply 10):
Countries do not specify autoland, aircraft do....in their specification.
Therefore, the statement that 'autoland is not available in Austraila'...is rubbish.
I've done many autolands in Australia, with L1011 equipment.
Fully approved.

Where?


User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 4644 times:



Quoting Swiftski (Reply 11):
Where?

MEL, PER.
The regulatory authority of the country of registration and our ops specs says we can, so we do.
Australia has no say in the matter.
There is a distinct difference between 'autoland' and a low visibility approach....IE, CATII/III.
Pros know the difference, amateurs likely don't.


User currently offlineDonnieCS From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 75 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 4566 times:

I think a lot of the misunderstanding is that most people associate auto land with CAT III approaches. If the aircraft can do CAT I ILS auto land and meets the weather minima for that approach, the way I understand it is it's an option if the crew would choose to do so. Why would a regulatory body care how the plane was landed. If auto land is usually used with 0/0 weather, why wouldn't you be aloud to use it with better weather.

Especially with development and deployment of GPS/WAAS (at least here in the U.S, and in business aviation and GA right now), I don't think that GPS auto land ability is to far off. It's the future, WAAS transmitters at every airport with precession approaches to every runway, which would lead to the ability to auto land just about any runway.



Charlie - Gulfstream flight mechanic
User currently offlineSwiftski From Australia, joined Dec 2006, 2701 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 4543 times:



Quoting 411A (Reply 12):
The regulatory authority of the country of registration and our ops specs says we can, so we do.
Australia has no say in the matter.

Reference: Australian AIP ENR 1.5-33

9.1


PUBLISHED ILS CAT II/III MINIMA MAY ONLY BE USED BY AIRCRAFT OPERATORS APPROVED BY (AUSTRALIAN) CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY


Also, out of interest, reference: CASA CAR 179A Instrument 06/09 (12JAN09)

A380 Autoland

"An Autoland is not permitted for revenue flights"



Good discussion about Autoland is Australia can be found on this archived post.

A380 To Be Autoland Only (by Tito Feb 25 2007 in Tech Ops)

Quoting DonnieCS (Reply 13):
I think a lot of the misunderstanding is that most people associate auto land with CAT III approaches.



Quoting 411A (Reply 12):
There is a distinct difference between 'autoland' and a low visibility approach....IE, CATII/III.

Maybe the 'problem' here is that my interpretation of "Full" Autoland was 0/0 - perhaps that is not what the poster was asking about.


User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2255 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 4518 times:



Quoting Swiftski (Reply 1):
Autoland is not available in Australia

not true

Quoting David L (Reply 3):
on a clear, still day, can't an autoland be conducted for currency?



Quoting Mandala499 (Reply 6):
you are allowed to conduct autoland practice (on a revenue flight) on a Cat 1 ILS when:
- The weather minimas allow for standard cat 1 ILS approach.
- Approved ILS approaches only (with protected glideslope transmitter area, adequate threshold clearing height, etc)
- ATC must be notified (so that no one crosses the damn runway between you and the glide slope transmitters)...
- Deviations in the ILS approach conducted to Cat 3 limits.
- Crew must be Low Vis Ops trained and current.
- Aircraft must still be current on the Autoland.

true

Quoting Swiftski (Reply 11):
There is nothing higher than a CAT II ILS in Australia.

not true. I have charts for CATIII mins to runway 16 at MEL. ILS X 16. This would be an autoland.

Quoting Swiftski (Reply 14):
Maybe the 'problem' here is that my interpretation of "Full" Autoland was 0/0 -



Not sure you quite understand then. Autoland is autoland. The definition may vary some from operator to operator but for us CATIII w/o rollout is a "must see to land" app; a CATIII w/ rollout does not require a see to land. I can let the jet autoland on a clear CAVOK day if I wish. As far as autoland not authorized in Australia I could find nothing to sustainuate this in the CRAR. I did find this that seems fairly standard: CAT II / III minima
Published ILS CAT II/III minima may only be used by aircraft operators approved by CASA.
Operators of Australian registered ACFT wishing to operate to CAT II/III minima outside Australia must
also make application to CASA.


User currently offlineSwiftski From Australia, joined Dec 2006, 2701 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4506 times:



Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 15):
not true



Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 15):
not true. I have charts for CATIII mins to runway 16 at MEL. ILS X 16. This would be an autoland.

Here is a link to the current Information for MEL from the AIP/ERSA. Valid till 11 March 2010

http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/...rent/ersa/FAC_YMML_19-Nov-2009.pdf

Here is a link to AirServices Australia page on Melbourne Tower

http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/...cilities/towers/melbournetower.asp

Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 15):
CATIII w/o rollout is a "must see to land"

I would call that a CAT IIIb

Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 15):
CATIII w/ rollout does not require a see to land

And this a CAT IIIc

Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 15):
I did find this that seems fairly standard: CAT II / III minima
Published ILS CAT II/III minima may only be used by aircraft operators approved by CASA

Same quote as mine from above in Australian AIP ENR 1.5-33

Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 15):
Not sure you quite understand then

I understand - I just assumed, for whatever reason, that the poster wanted to know about zero visibility autoland, even though he didn't specifically state so. Apologies to the OP for hijacking and taking the thread away from his question.


User currently offlineSwiftski From Australia, joined Dec 2006, 2701 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 4486 times:



Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 15):
I have charts for CATIII mins to runway 16 at MEL. ILS X 16. This would be an autoland.

I stand corrected. I'm off at the moment but checked with a friend who is at work.

I don't know why the current ERSA lists as CAT II only but as you say, Jepps confirm CATIIIB ILS is available. I didn't think this had gone in yet, from memory, but it seems it has.

Sorry for that bit of misinformation.


User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2255 posts, RR: 15
Reply 18, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 4477 times:



Quoting Swiftski (Reply 16):
Here is a link to the current Information for MEL from the AIP/ERSA. Valid till 11 March 2010

I may have missed something but I couldn't see any reference to CATIII notams there. Forgive me if I missed it, I'm still a little bleary eyed from 10 days on the road.

Quoting Swiftski (Reply 16):
I would call that a CAT IIIb

That's CATIIIa We actually refer to both designations CATIIIa = w/o rollout, CATIIIb = w/ rollout

Quoting Swiftski (Reply 16):
And this a CAT IIIc

That's CATIIIb
here's a quote from our manual:

CAT III operations are normally conducted using an Alert Height (AH). Fail-operational systems have been shown to have the capability to safely deliver the aircraft to the touchdown zone if the system is still fail-operational when the aircraft passes 100 FT AGL, even if failures occur in the system after passing this height. Therefore, there is no requirement to establish external visual reference at alert height.

Notes:
Some instrument approach procedures list a visual reference required altitude of 50 for CAT III approaches, e.g. HKG. In this situation, AH procedures are used, however visual reference by 50 is required to land.

CAT III Approaches Using AH With Rollout
The Captain may continue the approach below AH provided cockpit instrumentation indicates that the aircraft will safely touch down in the touchdown zone and safely rollout. Visual reference not required prior to touchdown unless the IAP lists a visual reference altitude

CAT III Approaches Using AH Without Rollout
The Captain may continue the approach below AH provided cockpit instrumentation indicates that the aircraft will safely touch down in the touchdown zone. Visual reference required by 50 to land.

Quoting Swiftski (Reply 16):
the poster wanted to know about zero visibility autoland

I've never seen a CATIIIC min published for any app I've ever flown


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Some Questions About Full Autoland
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
ATC Question: "Full Length"? posted Thu Dec 31 2009 08:47:49 by B747forever
Was Autoland Possible On Kai Tak Runway 13? posted Wed Nov 25 2009 07:20:45 by Faro
Ailerons In Full Down Deflection On Taxi/TO Roll? posted Sat Oct 3 2009 23:31:26 by EstorilM
Full Power Takeoffs posted Sun May 24 2009 23:15:01 by Flaps30
Full Flap Landings posted Sat May 23 2009 18:51:55 by C5LOAD
Could Concorde Turn At Full Speed? posted Sun Jan 25 2009 05:48:18 by A380900
Any Danger At Running Props Full Power? posted Tue Sep 2 2008 19:47:36 by Triebwerk
Could A Plane Take Off With Full Flaps? posted Thu Apr 24 2008 16:21:22 by UltimateDelta
Does The A340-600 Take Off With Full Flaps? posted Thu Mar 13 2008 13:13:11 by Happy-flier
Giving Up Full Flap During Landing posted Wed Mar 5 2008 08:41:34 by Emre767

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format