Hi folks,

Quick question. Its foggy today in SFO and many flights are either landing or going miss and trying again. I heard over the approach freq that the controller ask the airline/flight, i.e AA2661 what are you minimums where the pilots replied back as 4/4/3. What does 4/4/3 and how or where is that information found?? I understand that RVR minimums vary from airline to airline and airport however, if I was to look at the IAP chart to an airport, how does the pilots come up with there response, 4/4/3??

KSFO 201841Z 06003KT 1/4SM R28R/1000V2000FT FG VV003 09/08 A3037 RMK AO2 T00890078
KSFO 201808Z 00000KT 1/4SM R28R/1200V3000FT FG VV003 09/08 A3036 RMK AO2 T00890083
KSFO 201756Z 00000KT 1/4SM R28R/1200V2200FT FG VV003 08/08 A3035 RMK AO2 SLP278 T00830083 10083 20072 51013
KSFO 201728Z 09003KT 1/4SM R28R/1000V2200FT FG VV003 08/08 A3035 RMK AO2 T00830078
KSFO 201718Z 00000KT 1/4SM R28R/1200V2400FT FG VV003 08/08 A3035 RMK AO2 T00780078

4/4/3 refers to RVR required at the touchdown sensor, midpoint sensor and rollout sensor. In this case, 400 feet, 400 feet, and 300 feet of RVR are required. The minimums are on our Jepp CAT II/III ILS approach plates. Runway 28R has a CAT II and CAT III ILS approach and its minimums show an RVR of 6 (600), however operators can have different minimums.

When I was a lowly E175 capt, we could takeoff in 500 RVR conditions.

Another edit since I finally found what I was looking for:

I’m now on the 737. If I was flying a CAT III ILS to SFO 28R which requires an RVR of 600, we are required to have 600/600/300 RVR at the touchdown, midpoint, and rollout sensors. If the approach plate has an RVR of 300 as minimums (SEA 16C is an example), we can do a heads up display autoland to 400/400/300.

Snuffaluffagus wrote:

4/4/3 refers to RVR required at the touchdown sensor, midpoint sensor and rollout sensor. In this case, 400 feet, 400 feet, and 300 feet of RVR are required. The minimums are on our Jepp CAT II/III ILS approach plates. Runway 28R has a CAT II and CAT III ILS approach and its minimums show an RVR of 6 (600), however operators can have different minimums.

When I was a lowly E175 capt, we could takeoff in 500 RVR conditions.

Another edit since I finally found what I was looking for:

I’m now on the 737. If I was flying a CAT III ILS to SFO 28R which requires an RVR of 600, we are required to have 600/600/300 RVR at the touchdown, midpoint, and rollout sensors. If the approach plate has an RVR of 300 as minimums (SEA 16C is an example), we can do a heads up display autoland to 400/400/300.

Ok. So that I understood correctly, the minimums, depending on the type of CAT approach, when the pilots refers his minimums to ATC as 4/4/3 for example, he's using the minimums based off the Jepp chart, right?? But what happens if he states his minimums to be a bit higher that what is published on the chart, for example, pilots says 600 ft yet chart says 3 or 300 ft, that would mean the pilot would certainly go miss and try again/divert, right??

The minimums are based on the crew, airplane and the airline opspec

The minimums found on the chart are the runway minimums.

So you have to figure out your minimums based on which one of the 4 minimums is more restrictive.



There might be an instance when the controller asks the pilot for his minimums. (Wink-wink). Sometimes the controller might respond with new weather and it’s reporting xxx RVR which so happens to be the pilot minimums…

Some airlines may have authorization for lower minimums, in certain situations, as well. Alaska has a lot of this on certain RNP AR approaches that they paid to develop.

The RVR reports are common when weather is at, or close, to minimums.

N1120A wrote:

Some airlines may have authorization for lower minimums, in certain situations, as well. Alaska has a lot of this on certain RNP AR approaches that they paid to develop.

The RVR reports are common when weather is at, or close, to minimums.

Yes there are many Special Aircraft And Aircrew Authorization Required (SAAAR) procedures around the U.S. and Alaska along with Continental then Delta and American got involved followed by Southwest with RNP approaches, now just about every U.S. based airline is certified to fly them.

The controller must issue the RVR to arrivals/departures whenever the prevailing visibility is 1 mile or less regardless of the value indicated and when the RVR has a reported value regardless of prevailing visibility. It sure does put much more phraseology out there during those type of conditions especially when we had to issue touchdown, mid-point and roll-out to every arrival/departure during a push and ensure you say it correctly just in case something was to happen.

Got it. I now have a better understanding. I've always known that airlines have their own RVR restriction that may be at or above the approach minimum indicated on the chart. I think its time for me to hits the books for a refresher course, LOL.

IAHFLYR wrote:

N1120A wrote:

Some airlines may have authorization for lower minimums, in certain situations, as well. Alaska has a lot of this on certain RNP AR approaches that they paid to develop.

The RVR reports are common when weather is at, or close, to minimums.

Yes there are many Special Aircraft And Aircrew Authorization Required (SAAAR) procedures around the U.S. and Alaska along with Continental then Delta and American got involved followed by Southwest with RNP approaches, now just about every U.S. based airline is certified to fly them.

The controller must issue the RVR to arrivals/departures whenever the prevailing visibility is 1 mile or less regardless of the value indicated and when the RVR has a reported value regardless of prevailing visibility. It sure does put much more phraseology out there during those type of conditions especially when we had to issue touchdown, mid-point and roll-out to every arrival/departure during a push and ensure you say it correctly just in case something was to happen.

I'm not talking about the published SAAAR approaches, but the ones that are more limited in nature. Something like the RNP-M approach into KSAN, which only AS flies - while the other airlines fly the RNP-Z, if they are authorized.

N1120A wrote:

I'm not talking about the published SAAAR approaches, but the ones that are more limited in nature. Something like the RNP-M approach into KSAN, which only AS flies - while the other airlines fly the RNP-Z, if they are authorized.

Oh no, I get what you are referencing as CO had Specials for RNAV (GPS) then RNAV (RNP) to IAH for years where we in ATC had a waiver to run them in simultaneous dual/triple dependent/independent ops long before our 7110.65 handbook was finally changed.....and they were not published....only their dual GPS aircraft could fly them which was at the time everything but the single GPS B735's. My point was simply t(though might not have clearly explained, sorry) that there are published procedures where SAAAR is referenced in the notes or used to be shown on the charts though probably now days since I retired the published charts are more defined and SAAAR is not mentioned.