I have never questioned QF's safety before (yes, I am very quick to criticise their inflight service) but I suddenly had flashbacks to the incident (in KL) with the 747 aquaplaning.
Flawed flashback? Are you referring to the overrun at Bangkok?
As stated, 14/32 has no ILS and I believe the runway must be seen at a certain point of time during final approach and this altitude is set by the FAA? It works something like the CAT I/II/III approach. On the other hand the pilot might not have full details to the weather condition, or he probably wanted to make an attempt, they might just make it down anyway.
The approach to runway 14/32 is a VOR/DME non-precision approach
, nothing like a Cat I, II
or III ILS (precision) approach, with much higher ceiling and visibility requirements. The FAA has absolutely nothing to do with it,the Civil Aviation Safety Authority governs Australian aviation. Airservices Australia controls the airways.
Talking of procedures for weather diversions - which I'm now starting to understand more of! - why in this day and age would some International flights into MEL be diverted due to fog?
No Australian ILS facilities are rated to Cat II
or III due to the higher costs versus the very few days per year they would be required. It is a risk that a few flights per year will have to divert as the Cat I 200' minima is not sufficient.
Hope that clears a few things up!