Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20692
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:48 pm

FligtReporter wrote:
Starlionblue wrote:
FligtReporter wrote:

Ok Mr Starlion...He wasn't a terrorist just a plain straight murderer..I reckon this word is perfect for him.


Murderer, yes. But in my opinion not necessarily an evil person. What is known is that he was a sick person, as in he had a diagnosable illness that influenced his behaviour.

I have strong feelings on this matter, so please bear with me. ;)

I don't think labels like "murderer" get us to the core of the issue. More importantly, they don't help with making aviation safer in the future.

Again, we must ask "why". Why was this man's illness not "caught" before it could do damage? Why was he not removed from a position where he could hurt himself and others? Why did he not receive the help that he so badly needed? The man had seen many doctors. For better or worse, German labour laws did not allow medical information to be shared with the employer.

Some people have illnesses. This is not something that they choose. There was a breakdown here, in that a mentally ill person was being allowed to have control of an airliner.

The accident was horrific. But we cannot blame the pilot for an illness that he did not choose to have. And thus, in my opinion, we cannot entirely blame him for the actions he took under the influence of his illness.

Again, the question becomes, what safeguards can be put in place to prevent a recurrence? The obvious one is not to leave a pilot alone in the cockpit, a policy that many airlines have had in place for decades. Going deeper, the accessibility of non-judgemental assistance for various ailments is important. If this pilot had received help early, this accident might never have happened.


I understand Mr Starlion..I know he had "D" (Im not gonna name it for I believe naming it gives it power) and was going through suicidal thoughts and even though I'm not a type of person to share a lot of my personal stuff online but I was going through similar stuff back in 2015 but I have somehow learnt to put it at bay..The D thing can be controlled by no medicines but ourselves and our own will to control our mind and tell it that "I run you YOU DONT RUN ME" ...There are myriads of cases and I know it can be triggered by any childhood incident or PTSD or even medical treatment...I can't share much but All I wanna say is that despite all the mess so many of us go through we fight it..we defeat it and come out stronger !!

I feel sorry for him but not for what he did..I wish he had just jumped off the cliff or something than taking all those along with him.


I feel sorry for him but not for what he did..

Well put.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
FligtReporter
Topic Author
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sat Feb 27, 2021 2:03 pm

Starlionblue wrote:
FligtReporter wrote:
Starlionblue wrote:

Murderer, yes. But in my opinion not necessarily an evil person. What is known is that he was a sick person, as in he had a diagnosable illness that influenced his behaviour.

I have strong feelings on this matter, so please bear with me. ;)

I don't think labels like "murderer" get us to the core of the issue. More importantly, they don't help with making aviation safer in the future.

Again, we must ask "why". Why was this man's illness not "caught" before it could do damage? Why was he not removed from a position where he could hurt himself and others? Why did he not receive the help that he so badly needed? The man had seen many doctors. For better or worse, German labour laws did not allow medical information to be shared with the employer.

Some people have illnesses. This is not something that they choose. There was a breakdown here, in that a mentally ill person was being allowed to have control of an airliner.

The accident was horrific. But we cannot blame the pilot for an illness that he did not choose to have. And thus, in my opinion, we cannot entirely blame him for the actions he took under the influence of his illness.

Again, the question becomes, what safeguards can be put in place to prevent a recurrence? The obvious one is not to leave a pilot alone in the cockpit, a policy that many airlines have had in place for decades. Going deeper, the accessibility of non-judgemental assistance for various ailments is important. If this pilot had received help early, this accident might never have happened.


I understand Mr Starlion..I know he had "D" (Im not gonna name it for I believe naming it gives it power) and was going through suicidal thoughts and even though I'm not a type of person to share a lot of my personal stuff online but I was going through similar stuff back in 2015 but I have somehow learnt to put it at bay..The D thing can be controlled by no medicines but ourselves and our own will to control our mind and tell it that "I run you YOU DONT RUN ME" ...There are myriads of cases and I know it can be triggered by any childhood incident or PTSD or even medical treatment...I can't share much but All I wanna say is that despite all the mess so many of us go through we fight it..we defeat it and come out stronger !!

I feel sorry for him but not for what he did..I wish he had just jumped off the cliff or something than taking all those along with him.


I feel sorry for him but not for what he did..

Well put.


Thank you very much Mr Starlion once again for helping me out and being paitent with my persistent queries and questions,because of you I'm learning a lot and more than I had ever expected to learn online.Your precious time and valuable information means a lot to me,I hope you continue to keep patience with me,should I come up with more questions for you.

:)
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 7777
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sat Feb 27, 2021 2:49 pm

Basic tenets in safety mgt-you can’t punish away an error. Legal terms (negligence, for instance) and actions (jail time for touching down on the go around) have no place in safety critical systems. They make people feel better, perhaps but they don’t fix the latent errors in the system.

Also, this approach isn’t the fix where I’ve seen it start all legal and on final, the tower reads out a rapidly worsening RVR. I started an ILS at home base with 2000’ (prior to 1800 being an SA) and went missed with nothing in sight at DA. Another one in North Carolina with tower reporting well above minimums including ceiling on a GPS approach and, again, nothing visible at MDA, time to back to where I started the morning.
 
FligtReporter
Topic Author
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sat Feb 27, 2021 3:54 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Basic tenets in safety mgt-you can’t punish away an error. Legal terms (negligence, for instance) and actions (jail time for touching down on the go around) have no place in safety critical systems. They make people feel better, perhaps but they don’t fix the latent errors in the system.

Also, this approach isn’t the fix where I’ve seen it start all legal and on final, the tower reads out a rapidly worsening RVR. I started an ILS at home base with 2000’ (prior to 1800 being an SA) and went missed with nothing in sight at DA. Another one in North Carolina with tower reporting well above minimums including ceiling on a GPS approach and, again, nothing visible at MDA, time to back to where I started the morning.


Damn,the precariousness of it all is intriguing...It must be a challenging and time consuming task with such unpredictable scenarios isn't it Mr Galaxy ?You know I still wonder if I'd ever be able to find out the exact Visibility/RVR at the time of my flight's touchdown but I guess its all probability..so I satisfy my curiosity by estimating it to the closest METAR reading during the touchdown timeframe...But then I guess that's what weather truly is which is a constant change lolz
 
User avatar
SQ22
Moderator
Posts: 2291
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:29 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sat Feb 27, 2021 6:06 pm

May I kindly remind you to stay on topic? Feel free to continue your personal discussions by PM's, but subject of discussion is CAT IIIB. Thanks.
 
CosmicCruiser
Posts: 2507
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 3:01 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 1:16 am

I would say that the crew may not know the actually RVR when they touchdown. We had a co. policy that if the RVR dropped below CATIII mins after G/S capture, actually the feather, we were to make a MAP. I asked about it and was told that if below mins they didn't want you to try to taxi therefore miss. But I can attest to the fact that at least once the controllers "helped" us by giving the RVR as "mins" and not actual.
 
Woodreau
Posts: 2077
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2001 6:44 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 3:17 am

The only way to know the actual RVR is to look at the RVR reading in the tower and for the flight crew to ask the tower.

The only requirement is that at the final approach fix, the visibility has to be at or above minimums. If so, the approach may be continued.
When I was a new crewmember, I kept monitoring the visibility after crossing the FAF until a crusty captain told me you know if you keep monitoring that ASOS, it might say it’s less than 1/4 then what would you do? ..... I got the clue. So up until the FAF, as long as you know it’s at or above mins you continue. It can go to zero/zero after the FAF the only thing that matters after the FAF is that you get the required laundry list of items to effect a manual landing or keep monitoring the required items to ensure a successful autoland.

We don’t spend any brain cells thinking about what the RVR is after crossing the FAF. It’s irrelevant past that point. Either we get the required visual cues to land manually / appropriate FMA to autoland or we don’t.
Bonus animus sit, ab experientia. Quod salvatum fuerit de malis usu venit judicium.
 
FligtReporter
Topic Author
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 4:38 am

Woodreau wrote:
The only way to know the actual RVR is to look at the RVR reading in the tower and for the flight crew to ask the tower.

The only requirement is that at the final approach fix, the visibility has to be at or above minimums. If so, the approach may be continued.
When I was a new crewmember, I kept monitoring the visibility after crossing the FAF until a crusty captain told me you know if you keep monitoring that ASOS, it might say it’s less than 1/4 then what would you do? ..... I got the clue. So up until the FAF, as long as you know it’s at or above mins you continue. It can go to zero/zero after the FAF the only thing that matters after the FAF is that you get the required laundry list of items to effect a manual landing or keep monitoring the required items to ensure a successful autoland.

We don’t spend any brain cells thinking about what the RVR is after crossing the FAF. It’s irrelevant past that point. Either we get the required visual cues to land manually / appropriate FMA to autoland or we don’t.


You know what Mr.Woodreau a few days ago I was actually contemplating this very thing you mentioned or quite similar to this..I figured theres no way I could know the EXACT RVR at the very moment of touchdown so I'd rather find out the approximate and after going through METARs and ILS CAT II/IIIA/IIIB approach charts of my base..I figured out the actual RVR is nothing but an approximate condition at a given time on the basis of which the planning for the final approach or approach type is done and even if the actual RVR had been a little below 100 or above 100 I believe the crew had already prepared for a CAT IIIB approach anyways given the time we were hovering till we crossed FAF it was reported 75 and 100 meters respectively,So I can't ever get the results I would wish for and its better to just be satisfied with the most possible results I can find.

As per my analysis
RVR at Patterns 75M 2:30
RVR at FAF 100M 3:00 (Touchdown at 3:09)
RVR after 30 Minutes 750M 3:30

So we touched down 9 minutes after the Closest reported RVR was 100M and given the very next observation reports 750M it means it must be improving further during our final glide and even if I go in the details to find out the rate of descent and distance I may still not be able to find out the exact numbers..However,I reckon the closest I could get with my own analysis of the situation is that during the final touchdown Its possible the RVR could have been between 100 - 125 or 175 ...But what eventually matters the most is that I had a great experience and I should probably be satisfied with that itself :lol:

Thanks Mr Woodreau !
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20692
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 7:57 am

As Woodreau says, there's no point worrying about the RVR once you've commenced the approach.

At my operator, if the reported RVR falls below minima and we're above 1000 feet, we go missed. If the same thing happens below 1000 feet, we can go all the way to minima and "have a look".

The reported RVR only gets you so far. If at minima you have the required visual references, you can land. If not, you go around.

If you're doing a CATIIIB autoland you just close your eyes and trust the aircraft. I jest. I jest. :D
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
FligtReporter
Topic Author
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 8:08 am

Starlionblue wrote:
As Woodreau says, there's no point worrying about the RVR once you've commenced the approach.

At my operator, if the reported RVR falls below minima and we're above 1000 feet, we go missed. If the same thing happens below 1000 feet, we can go all the way to minima and "have a look".

The reported RVR only gets you so far. If at minima you have the required visual references, you can land. If not, you go around.

If you're doing a CATIIIB autoland you just close your eyes and trust the aircraft. I jest. I jest. :D


:rotfl: True Mr Starlion...to this day I find it amazing that the autoland was much smoother than some of the clear day manual landings Ive exprienced lol...I guess I will have to wait for next winters to get a chance of experiencing it again.

What makes me feel so amazed about the CAT IIIB is the sheer blindness of it all and yet somehow safely being on the ground...though taxing is a task in itself but I wonder if in near future we may have worlds first fully functional CAT IIIC airport too where the airrcafts would taxi themselves to the designated parking bay just like they align and automatically land.

The day any airport in the world gets CAT IIIC I will be the first one flying that destination in winters !
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20692
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 8:32 am

The smoothness comes from two things:
- Modern autopilots are very very good. They react faster and can control the trajectory more precisely than fleshbag pilots.
- If CATIIIC conditions exist, most likely the air is quite stable. It follows that you won't have much in the way of wind gusts. This makes for a smooth approach. On a very clear day, on the other hand, you might well have unstable air and convective activity. This makes for a bumpy approach.

While visually we are "blind", the radio signals guiding us, and the GPIRS systems determining our position, are certainly not "blind". They don't need the visual spectrum and work just as well in thick fog and cloud and in clear conditions.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
FligtReporter
Topic Author
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 8:55 am

Starlionblue wrote:
The smoothness comes from two things:
- Modern autopilots are very very good. They react faster and can control the trajectory more precisely than fleshbag pilots.
- If CATIIIC conditions exist, most likely the air is quite stable. It follows that you won't have much in the way of wind gusts. This makes for a smooth approach. On a very clear day, on the other hand, you might well have unstable air and convective activity. This makes for a bumpy approach.

While visually we are "blind", the radio signals guiding us, and the GPIRS systems determining our position, are certainly not "blind". They don't need the visual spectrum and work just as well in thick fog and cloud and in clear conditions.


Ahaan....Thanks Mr Starlion !
 
Woodreau
Posts: 2077
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2001 6:44 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 1:24 pm

I find that my “worst” landings are on calm windless days when the ride during approach is smooth. Those landings tend to be “firm” or who taught you how to land?

on days where it’s gusty and I’m constantly having to correct for gusts and I’m wiggling and nudging the side stick constantly, the approaches are rough, but these are the “smoothest” landings to the point that you don’t feel the plane “land” and several times the airplane has complained when I deployed the thrust reversers after touchdown because the airplane thought it was still airborne. The plane touched down so lightly, it didn’t register the transition from airborne to on the ground..


Maintenance sometimes asks us to do an autoland for maintenance purposes when a plane has to perform an autoland to maintain its cat 3 certification. We have to let atc know we’re doing an autoland, but they won’t protect the ILS critical area, so we have to ensure not to exceed any tolerances. I’ve had to disconnect the autopilot on many VMC maintenance autolands because a plane holding short of the runway disrupted the ILS signal enough to cause the plane to deviate from desired flight path or winds were exceeding wind limits... during actual cat 3 conditions there normally wouldn’t be any objects inside the critical area or crosswinds.
Bonus animus sit, ab experientia. Quod salvatum fuerit de malis usu venit judicium.
 
FligtReporter
Topic Author
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 2:39 pm

Woodreau wrote:
I find that my “worst” landings are on calm windless days when the ride during approach is smooth. Those landings tend to be “firm” or who taught you how to land?

on days where it’s gusty and I’m constantly having to correct for gusts and I’m wiggling and nudging the side stick constantly, the approaches are rough, but these are the “smoothest” landings to the point that you don’t feel the plane “land” and several times the airplane has complained when I deployed the thrust reversers after touchdown because the airplane thought it was still airborne. The plane touched down so lightly, it didn’t register the transition from airborne to on the ground..


Maintenance sometimes asks us to do an autoland for maintenance purposes when a plane has to perform an autoland to maintain its cat 3 certification. We have to let atc know we’re doing an autoland, but they won’t protect the ILS critical area, so we have to ensure not to exceed any tolerances. I’ve had to disconnect the autopilot on many VMC maintenance autolands because a plane holding short of the runway disrupted the ILS signal enough to cause the plane to deviate from desired flight path or winds were exceeding wind limits... during actual cat 3 conditions there normally wouldn’t be any objects inside the critical area or crosswinds.


I think you haven't watched my CAT IIIB landing video...It actually is one of the smoothest one as well apart from being so special to me anyways...It was my first time as you already know and I was expecting it to be hard landing but I have to say my first impression of the autopilot on A321NX was very good and I think autopilot lands very smoothly but then also I have to mention that during my landing the conditions were such that it kind of supported a butter landing with winds and everything calm.

I still remember my smoothest clear day hand flown landing till date was back in 2012 or 13 onboard IndiGo 320 IAE and we landed on RWY 09 at my homebase.

BTW....for some reason I have always felt that Airbus 320s/321s even if hand landed gave me smoother landing compared to the Boeing 737s that I've always flown..now I have flown 737s of Jet Airways,Spicejet,Malaysia Airlines,FLYdubai and all of them had hard landings I don't know if the landing gears of 737s or something with it that makes landings harder on it...I have flown 320s/321s of Air India,IndiGo,Sri Lankan,Nepal Airlines,Thai smile and all of them have been smoother and I do think Airbus must be doing something right.
 
IAHFLYR
Posts: 4351
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 12:56 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 3:14 pm

CosmicCruiser wrote:
I would say that the crew may not know the actually RVR when they touchdown. We had a co. policy that if the RVR dropped below CATIII mins after G/S capture, actually the feather, we were to make a MAP. I asked about it and was told that if below mins they didn't want you to try to taxi therefore miss. But I can attest to the fact that at least once the controllers "helped" us by giving the RVR as "mins" and not actual.


When the RVR was changing from above to below mins I'd issue it to the crew when I told them to contact the tower right before the final approach fix and then call the local controller and tell them I just issued the RVR to N12345, don't give it again just in case it happened to go below mins. Just let them fly the approach and if the can land they will. But of course once you had dual/triple approaches in use the requirement for the crew to be on the tower frequency prior to the highest aircraft intercepting the GS (final monitors and that's an entire different subject) changed that concept.
Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.
 
FligtReporter
Topic Author
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 4:23 pm

IAHFLYR wrote:
CosmicCruiser wrote:
I would say that the crew may not know the actually RVR when they touchdown. We had a co. policy that if the RVR dropped below CATIII mins after G/S capture, actually the feather, we were to make a MAP. I asked about it and was told that if below mins they didn't want you to try to taxi therefore miss. But I can attest to the fact that at least once the controllers "helped" us by giving the RVR as "mins" and not actual.


When the RVR was changing from above to below mins I'd issue it to the crew when I told them to contact the tower right before the final approach fix and then call the local controller and tell them I just issued the RVR to N12345, don't give it again just in case it happened to go below mins. Just let them fly the approach and if the can land they will. But of course once you had dual/triple approaches in use the requirement for the crew to be on the tower frequency prior to the highest aircraft intercepting the GS (final monitors and that's an entire different subject) changed that concept.


Hmm..Thanks for this Mr IAH....This may be the answer to one of my Questions..So if before the final approach point the last reported RVR hasnt gone below minimums and conditions are within the capacity of the crew and aircraft to carry out the approach then there is no need to give any further info regarding it as they will continue with their approach as planned right and do as they intended to do...I belive this is what we call No significant change.
 
IAHFLYR
Posts: 4351
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 12:56 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 4:59 pm

FligtReporter wrote:
Hmm..Thanks for this Mr IAH....This may be the answer to one of my Questions..So if before the final approach point the last reported RVR hasnt gone below minimums and conditions are within the capacity of the crew and aircraft to carry out the approach then there is no need to give any further info regarding it as they will continue with their approach as planned right and do as they intended to do...I belive this is what we call No significant change.


Unless this has changed since my retirement (which it could have), once they are at or inside the FAF they've started the approach and even if the RVR changes to below mins they are able to proceed with the approach to their DA and land.
Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.
 
Woodreau
Posts: 2077
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2001 6:44 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 5:30 pm

Every time I’ve been given a RVR below minimums and I’ve declined the approach clearance, the controller has always asked “what are your minimums?”

We tell them, and the controller has always responded, “oh looks like RVR’s come up. RVR is now .... (the minimums I just told them). Maintain xxx until established or cross FAF at xxxx, cleared for the ils xx. approach, contact tower. 1xx.xx”
Bonus animus sit, ab experientia. Quod salvatum fuerit de malis usu venit judicium.
 
IAHFLYR
Posts: 4351
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 12:56 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 5:37 pm

Woodreau wrote:
Every time I’ve been given a RVR below minimums and I’ve declined the approach clearance, the controller has always asked “what are your minimums?”

We tell them, and the controller has always responded, “oh looks like RVR’s come up. RVR is now .... (the minimums I just told them). Maintain xxx until established or cross FAF at xxxx, cleared for the ils xx. approach, contact tower. 1xx.xx”


Gee, imagine that! :o

There is a fine line there for sure. I cannot remember if the RVR indicators in the tower/TRACON are recorded or not, but creativity at it's best always seems to work. :thumbsup:
Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.
 
FligtReporter
Topic Author
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 10:28 pm

IAHFLYR wrote:
FligtReporter wrote:
Hmm..Thanks for this Mr IAH....This may be the answer to one of my Questions..So if before the final approach point the last reported RVR hasnt gone below minimums and conditions are within the capacity of the crew and aircraft to carry out the approach then there is no need to give any further info regarding it as they will continue with their approach as planned right and do as they intended to do...I belive this is what we call No significant change.


Unless this has changed since my retirement (which it could have), once they are at or inside the FAF they've started the approach and even if the RVR changes to below mins they are able to proceed with the approach to their DA and land.


Thanks Mr IAH !
 
FligtReporter
Topic Author
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:03 pm

Woodreau wrote:
Every time I’ve been given a RVR below minimums and I’ve declined the approach clearance, the controller has always asked “what are your minimums?”

We tell them, and the controller has always responded, “oh looks like RVR’s come up. RVR is now .... (the minimums I just told them). Maintain xxx until established or cross FAF at xxxx, cleared for the ils xx. approach, contact tower. 1xx.xx”


CAT IIIB makes the RVR thing seem like a joke when you can't even properly see the sharklet of the aircraft :lol: Like we gotta trust this tech with our lives quite literally that it gets us down safely.

I have watched some 50 and 75 RVR cockpit videos at DEL and I can honestly say that as exciting it was for me as a pax to experience such blind landing it was as scary to see it from the cockpit view..I mean at least as a pax I could see wings,though blurred by fog,but I knew they were there but in cockpit view all I saw was the white and 50,40 30 and even before I could figure out,it was Retard..Voila .and I was like "What the Stevie Wonder was that ?"

I'm still amazed by this technology and I mentioned it earlier that I wish we could have automatic taxing system too but I guess it would take time before we could reach the IIIC level...I can only imagine how cool and exciting would that be.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 20692
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:53 pm

FligtReporter wrote:
Woodreau wrote:
Every time I’ve been given a RVR below minimums and I’ve declined the approach clearance, the controller has always asked “what are your minimums?”

We tell them, and the controller has always responded, “oh looks like RVR’s come up. RVR is now .... (the minimums I just told them). Maintain xxx until established or cross FAF at xxxx, cleared for the ils xx. approach, contact tower. 1xx.xx”


CAT IIIB makes the RVR thing seem like a joke when you can't even properly see the sharklet of the aircraft :lol: Like we gotta trust this tech with our lives quite literally that it gets us down safely.

I have watched some 50 and 75 RVR cockpit videos at DEL and I can honestly say that as exciting it was for me as a pax to experience such blind landing it was as scary to see it from the cockpit view..I mean at least as a pax I could see wings,though blurred by fog,but I knew they were there but in cockpit view all I saw was the white and 50,40 30 and even before I could figure out,it was Retard..Voila .and I was like "What the Stevie Wonder was that ?"

I'm still amazed by this technology and I mentioned it earlier that I wish we could have automatic taxing system too but I guess it would take time before we could reach the IIIC level...I can only imagine how cool and exciting would that be.


We might not be able to see outside, but we can see the instruments just fine. They're our primary reference most of the time anyway, so we're quite comfortable with their use.

Apart from taxi, take-off, final approach and landing, we don't really use outside references very much.

On an autoland, the PM should not be looking outside at all.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
Woodreau
Posts: 2077
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2001 6:44 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:30 am

I’ve only done cat iii in the simulator. I’m not focused on looking outside at any point during the approach and landing.

I’m monitoring FMA. Checking to see the airplane is doing what it’s supposed to be doing and that the electronic guidance is valid throughout the entire approach landing and rollout.

I’m looking for LAND, FLARE, THR IDLE and ROLLOUT.

If I don’t get any of these FMAs then other things need to happen depending on which FMA are not annunciated.

Only after ROLLOUT and deploying the thrust reversers, do I get the luxury of looking outside to see what’s going on.

Even after I get ROLLOUT if I disconnect the autopilot after rolling out at what the check airman considers an “unsafe” taxi speed in the vicinity of a designated SMGCS exit point, the visibility instantly deteriorates to zero/zero and the instructor wants to see how you’re going to safely navigate off the runway.
Bonus animus sit, ab experientia. Quod salvatum fuerit de malis usu venit judicium.
 
FligtReporter
Topic Author
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Mon Mar 01, 2021 2:05 am

Starlionblue wrote:
FligtReporter wrote:
Woodreau wrote:
Every time I’ve been given a RVR below minimums and I’ve declined the approach clearance, the controller has always asked “what are your minimums?”

We tell them, and the controller has always responded, “oh looks like RVR’s come up. RVR is now .... (the minimums I just told them). Maintain xxx until established or cross FAF at xxxx, cleared for the ils xx. approach, contact tower. 1xx.xx”


CAT IIIB makes the RVR thing seem like a joke when you can't even properly see the sharklet of the aircraft :lol: Like we gotta trust this tech with our lives quite literally that it gets us down safely.

I have watched some 50 and 75 RVR cockpit videos at DEL and I can honestly say that as exciting it was for me as a pax to experience such blind landing it was as scary to see it from the cockpit view..I mean at least as a pax I could see wings,though blurred by fog,but I knew they were there but in cockpit view all I saw was the white and 50,40 30 and even before I could figure out,it was Retard..Voila .and I was like "What the Stevie Wonder was that ?"

I'm still amazed by this technology and I mentioned it earlier that I wish we could have automatic taxing system too but I guess it would take time before we could reach the IIIC level...I can only imagine how cool and exciting would that be.


We might not be able to see outside, but we can see the instruments just fine. They're our primary reference most of the time anyway, so we're quite comfortable with their use.

Apart from taxi, take-off, final approach and landing, we don't really use outside references very much.

On an autoland, the PM should not be looking outside at all.


Oh really...It means I'm right these instruments quite literally be trusted with our lives..and talking about instruments,this reminds me of the instrument malfunction crashes but I won't get into that..I will save that for another thread.

Thanks for your answer Mr Starlion.
 
FligtReporter
Topic Author
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Mon Mar 01, 2021 2:27 am

Woodreau wrote:
I’ve only done cat iii in the simulator. I’m not focused on looking outside at any point during the approach and landing.

I’m monitoring FMA. Checking to see the airplane is doing what it’s supposed to be doing and that the electronic guidance is valid throughout the entire approach landing and rollout.

I’m looking for LAND, FLARE, THR IDLE and ROLLOUT.

If I don’t get any of these FMAs then other things need to happen depending on which FMA are not annunciated.

Only after ROLLOUT and deploying the thrust reversers, do I get the luxury of looking outside to see what’s going on.

Even after I get ROLLOUT if I disconnect the autopilot after rolling out at what the check airman considers an “unsafe” taxi speed in the vicinity of a designated SMGCS exit point, the visibility instantly deteriorates to zero/zero and the instructor wants to see how you’re going to safely navigate off the runway.


Thanks Mr Woodreau...I can say by my personal experience that during the autoland I didn't even feel the flare or anything..just saw blurred runway borderline 3 seconds or so before we landed smooth...like normally on clear day landings I could feel the plane flaring up like the front portion going a little up before touching down on the main gears and sometimes I've even felt the plane touching down and jumping back in the air only to smash on the RWY again(Usually on B737s)..But I guess the reason for it is during clear day we can see the changes with reference to the outside view but in the autoland there is no outside view until 3 seconds to touchdown and even after that just the outside view is nothing but the markings on the runway or taxiways.

And talking about taxing then though It was really slow but now I know the answers of all my intriguing remarks during taxing...I feel taxing must be more complex than the landing itself...BTW Mr Woodreu, Do you see see aircrafts taxing themselves to the designated bays automatically anytime soon ?

If Yes,then what will be the challenges according to you ?
If No,then Why do you think its not viable ?

Thanks Mr Woodreau !
 
FligtReporter
Topic Author
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Mon Mar 01, 2021 4:46 am

Hello Everyone,

I have a question related to "North Indian Fog"..So I was reading about a RWY excursion incident at KTM back in 2015 where an Airbus 333 attempted to land during poor visibility and below the level it could be landed in and ended up becoming an aviation museum having been written off for further operations...now KTM is just around 30 or 40ish Minutes North East from my base LKO and I believe KTM didn't have any ILS system back then but the pilots could have diverted to my base given back in 2015 we still had CAT II and given the weather conditions during winter months are more or less the same in whole of North Indian belt which is Foggy or smogy..I believe had the crew diverted to my base than being persistent to land at KTM the incident could have been averted.

BTW..this whole incident somehow makes me wonder that why the winter fog here in North India which is like a mix of smoke or smog etc looks more like a cloud on the ground whereas I have been to other countries where the fog flows but here its like more thick and it doesn't diccipate as sooner as other places and I was wondering if anyone of you ever had an experience with this North Indian "Fog" which is like a patch of cloud compared to other places where the fog is free flowing making it stay more longer than normal flowing fog..like here ever morning from DEC to EARLY FEB is a foggy smogy morning from 3 or 4 AM to 10 -11AM.

I do think its because there are no winds to blow it away but I wonder could it also because of the pollution etc which makes it so thick ?
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 7777
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Mon Mar 01, 2021 3:26 pm

KTM accident was on an RNAV RNP AR approach, visibility was variable, but reported at 1000m in some quandrants and was 200m at the time of the accident. The reported weather looked good enough to begin the approach, but clearly wasn’t, the crew continued on with the autopilot engaged until 14 FEET AGL. Yes, should have left for the alternate.

Pollution, zero air mass movement up against the Himalaya, flat valley all contribute, but the smoke and vehicle pollution multiply the natural effect. Like LA, which was the “valley of smoke” to the natives, human pollution made a natural phenomenon much worse. PEK is the same.

Here is the report,

https://reports.aviation-safety.net/201 ... TC-JOC.pdf
 
FligtReporter
Topic Author
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Mon Mar 01, 2021 4:00 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
KTM accident was on an RNAV RNP AR approach, visibility was variable, but reported at 1000m in some quandrants and was 200m at the time of the accident. The reported weather looked good enough to begin the approach, but clearly wasn’t, the crew continued on with the autopilot engaged until 14 FEET AGL. Yes, should have left for the alternate.

Pollution, zero air mass movement up against the Himalaya, flat valley all contribute, but the smoke and vehicle pollution multiply the natural effect. Like LA, which was the “valley of smoke” to the natives, human pollution made a natural phenomenon much worse. PEK is the same.

Here is the report,

https://reports.aviation-safety.net/201 ... TC-JOC.pdf


Thanks for that Mr Galaxy..I'm womdering why don't Nepal authorities invest in a CAT IIIB ILS ? It has pretty much similar weather conditions like we do here in North India.

I mean I have to say there are so many benefits of this ILS and first one being 0 Cancelation due to fog and my home base is a bright example of this..ever since we got the CAT IIIB back in 2016 we have never had cancelations due to fog and I monitor planes landing here at even 50M RVR..I myself landed close to about 100 meters RVR and Just imagine if KTM had CAT IIIB,Turkish would probably put the appropriate crew and aircraft on this route and this would have never had happened.

I think Nepal aviation authorities are probably too poor to invest in CAT IIIB because I know to install it is a very costly affair but to keep it running and maintaining it is a hefty feat too.I doubt if they even have CAT I ...if not then I guess I won't be surprised if I hear another such incident at KTM.
 
VMCA787
Posts: 236
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2020 9:31 pm

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Mon Mar 01, 2021 4:56 pm

FligtReporter wrote:

Thanks for that Mr Galaxy..I'm womdering why don't Nepal authorities invest in a CAT IIIB ILS ? It has pretty much similar weather conditions like we do here in North India.



Just to ask again, you do realize not every runway can become a CATIIIB runway. There is more than just adding the localizer and G/S. One of the biggest limitations is the terrain on the extended C/L of the approach.
Fly fast, live slow!
 
FligtReporter
Topic Author
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Mon Mar 01, 2021 5:14 pm

VMCA787 wrote:
FligtReporter wrote:

Thanks for that Mr Galaxy..I'm womdering why don't Nepal authorities invest in a CAT IIIB ILS ? It has pretty much similar weather conditions like we do here in North India.



Just to ask again, you do realize not every runway can become a CATIIIB runway. There is more than just adding the localizer and G/S. One of the biggest limitations is the terrain on the extended C/L of the approach.


Oh yeah how did I forget about the terrain...Ive been to KTM once and I know its surrounded by himalayan ranges and its right in the middle of the city on a little elevated zone than the rest of the city...Hmm..So I guess KTM would probably have to stay like this dangerous airport for ever.
 
e38
Posts: 859
Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 10:09 pm

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Mon Mar 01, 2021 5:49 pm

FligtReporter wrote:
I guess KTM would probably have to stay like this dangerous airport for ever.


FligtReporter, Kathmandu Tribhuvan International Airport (KTM/VNKT) is not necessarily a dangerous airport. Certainly, the terrain and weather conditions can present some operational challenges, but if crew members adhere to published weather minima, strictly follow operational procedures, and plan sufficient fuel to divert to an alternate airport as appropriate, then it is quite possible to regularly conduct safe flight operations in and out of the airport without any problem. Just because an airport may not have an ILS approach does not make it a dangerous airport.

I'm sure you've heard this saying:

"Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous. But to an even greater degree than the sea, it is terribly unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect."

(From Captain A. G. Lamplugh, British Aviation Insurance Group, London, 1930s)

e38
 
FligtReporter
Topic Author
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:03 am

Re: The Magic of "CAT IIIB"

Tue Mar 02, 2021 12:27 am

e38 wrote:
FligtReporter wrote:
I guess KTM would probably have to stay like this dangerous airport for ever.


FligtReporter, Kathmandu Tribhuvan International Airport (KTM/VNKT) is not necessarily a dangerous airport. Certainly, the terrain and weather conditions can present some operational challenges, but if crew members adhere to published weather minima, strictly follow operational procedures, and plan sufficient fuel to divert to an alternate airport as appropriate, then it is quite possible to regularly conduct safe flight operations in and out of the airport without any problem. Just because an airport may not have an ILS approach does not make it a dangerous airport.

I'm sure you've heard this saying:

"Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous. But to an even greater degree than the sea, it is terribly unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect."

(From Captain A. G. Lamplugh, British Aviation Insurance Group, London, 1930s)

e38


Got it ..Thanks for that Mr E38 !

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: graceintheair and 11 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos