Approach ban

Discuss topics related to Air Transat.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, Sulako, North Shore

Post Reply
thenoflyzone
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 70
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 2:19 pm
Location: YUL

Approach ban

Post by thenoflyzone » Thu Feb 13, 2020 7:27 pm

Quick question.

TS A321. CATI ILS on a runway with HIALS but no CL. What is the minimum RVR required to fly the approach and attempt a landing?
---------- ADS -----------
  
us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record ! We haven't left one up there yet !

indieadventurer
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 253
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 7:59 am

Re: Approach ban

Post by indieadventurer » Thu Feb 13, 2020 7:56 pm

Without centre-line lighting 3/8 SM or 1600 RVR, assuming standard 1/2 2600 RVR advisory visibility for the CAT 1.

That answer is not TSC specific.
---------- ADS -----------
  

thenoflyzone
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 70
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 2:19 pm
Location: YUL

Re: Approach ban

Post by thenoflyzone » Fri Feb 14, 2020 5:15 am

So no OPS SPEC to go down to 1200?
---------- ADS -----------
  
us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record ! We haven't left one up there yet !

indieadventurer
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 253
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 7:59 am

Re: Approach ban

Post by indieadventurer » Fri Feb 14, 2020 6:27 am

The ops spec requires runway centreline lighting on a CAT 1 for 1200 RVR.
---------- ADS -----------
  

chaster
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 9:50 am

Re: Approach ban

Post by chaster » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:16 am

Are you a COP or just Curious? :)
---------- ADS -----------
  

thenoflyzone
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 70
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 2:19 pm
Location: YUL

Re: Approach ban

Post by thenoflyzone » Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:29 pm

Just curious. My signature below each of my posts doesn’t hide who I am.

I’ll put it to you another way.

At the airport I work at, RVRs dropped down to 1200ft and below for a few hours. Every remaining lander that night diverted (about 10-15 planes) except one. A Transat A321. He landed with the RVR steady at 1200ft throughout his approach.

Hence why I asked.
---------- ADS -----------
  
us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record ! We haven't left one up there yet !

ant_321
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 566
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 8:43 pm

Re: Approach ban

Post by ant_321 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 1:24 pm

I’m not sure about transat but I was under the impression most larger carriers weren’t using the 1200 RVR CAT 1 ops Spec any more. Where I work we need at least 1600 for a CAT 1 regardless of lighting.
---------- ADS -----------
  

GoinVertical
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 104
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:12 pm

Re: Approach ban

Post by GoinVertical » Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:17 pm

Does the runway have an LPV with advisory vis of 1/2 sm?

I don't work for Transat, but our ops spec allows for non precision approaches and "approaches with vertical guidance" to 50% without centreline lighting, but you need it for a Cat 1.

Not sure if this is a loophole or if we are all reading it wrong, but the way I take it is if the advisory vis is 1/2 sm, we are good to 1200 RVR on an LPV even without CL Lighting...

If someone can correct me or make more sense of it please do, because I know that this doesn't make sense from a common-sense point of view.
---------- ADS -----------
  

digits_
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2639
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:26 am

Re: Approach ban

Post by digits_ » Fri Feb 14, 2020 5:01 pm

GoinVertical wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:17 pm


Not sure if this is a loophole or if we are all reading it wrong, but the way I take it is if the advisory vis is 1/2 sm, we are good to 1200 RVR on an LPV even without CL Lighting...
I don't know the specifics at Air Transat, but you are correct that some ops specs allow you to have lower approach ban minima for an LPV than for an ILS.

Not entirely sure what the idea behind it is. Then again, I'm not entirely sure what the purpose of the approach ban is nowadays.
---------- ADS -----------
  
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship

FICU
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1248
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:37 am

Re: Approach ban

Post by FICU » Fri Feb 14, 2020 5:06 pm

I think an RNAV LPV is still considered a "non precision" approach so the ILS CAT1 approach ban doesn't apply to it.
---------- ADS -----------
  

rudder
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1929
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: Approach ban

Post by rudder » Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:10 am

For the purpose of an IFR ride, TC considers a WAAS enabled GPS approach to LPV minimums to be a precision approach.

Why? Due to vertical guidance.

When you consider that the LPV minimums are near or at Cat 1 minimums for several approaches in Canada it validates that supposition.

OPS SPECS are issued carrier specific (but are often similarly worded). Answer to any OPS SPEC question would have to come directly from that carrier.
---------- ADS -----------
  

FICU
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1248
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:37 am

Re: Approach ban

Post by FICU » Sun Feb 16, 2020 10:47 am

Interesting because for the enforcement of the approach ban a RNAV LPV is still considered non-precision... unless that has changed.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Cessna 180
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:28 pm
Location: YKF

Re: Approach ban

Post by Cessna 180 » Sun Feb 16, 2020 10:00 pm

What TC allows as practice (LPV instead of ILS for a check ride), isn't consistent with real world application or the regulations. A LPV approach is not a precision approach. They're just using it as practice because it's "good enough" to test a candidate (just like a hood is "good enough" to simulate IMC).
---------- ADS -----------
  

thenoflyzone
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 70
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 2:19 pm
Location: YUL

Re: Approach ban

Post by thenoflyzone » Sun Feb 16, 2020 10:59 pm

GoinVertical wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:17 pm
Does the runway have an LPV with advisory vis of 1/2 sm?
Yes it does.
---------- ADS -----------
  
us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record ! We haven't left one up there yet !

GoinVertical
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 104
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:12 pm

Re: Approach ban

Post by GoinVertical » Mon Feb 17, 2020 12:37 pm

thenoflyzone wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 10:59 pm
GoinVertical wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 4:17 pm
Does the runway have an LPV with advisory vis of 1/2 sm?
Yes it does.
24L in YUL is my guess? I was flying that night just before the fog rolled in. If they are LPV equipped and their Ops Spec reads the same as ours then I guess the LPV is legal at RVR1200 even without CL Lighting. Maybe someone from Transat can contribute.
---------- ADS -----------
  

airway
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 10:17 am

Re: Approach ban

Post by airway » Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:56 pm

thenoflyzone wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 7:27 pm
Quick question.

TS A321. CATI ILS on a runway with HIALS but no CL. What is the minimum RVR required to fly the approach and attempt a landing?
At Jazz:

ILS CAT I:
1200 RVR with HUD
1800 RVR without HUD


LPV/LNAV/VNAV or any Non Precision Approach:
2400 RVR at the lowest (variables that can raise that though)
---------- ADS -----------
  

GoHomeLeg
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 9:13 am

Re: Approach ban

Post by GoHomeLeg » Tue Feb 18, 2020 6:48 pm

thenoflyzone wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 7:27 pm
Quick question.

TS A321. CATI ILS on a runway with HIALS but no CL. What is the minimum RVR required to fly the approach and attempt a landing?

What airport?

And was it a c- registration?

At my company ops spec 75 allows us 3/8sm 1600RVR (=1/2sm 2600RVR) Canada.

And our U.S. Foreign Ops Spec allows reduced CAT 1 landing minimum has lows a 1800RVR with or without including airports with, but inoperative TDZ, RCL lights IAW the following:

The authorized aircraft is equipped with an approved FD, AP, or HUD approved for at least CAT 1 that provides guidance to a DA.

Provided the note at the bottom of the approach plate says you can.

If they knew the RVR was below minimums before crossing the FAF, they should've discontinued the approach.

Or maybe they took it upon themselves to set up a CAT 2.

Or maybe they just didn't give a f***.
---------- ADS -----------
  

thenoflyzone
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 70
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 2:19 pm
Location: YUL

Re: Approach ban

Post by thenoflyzone » Tue Feb 18, 2020 7:07 pm

GoinVertical wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 12:37 pm


24L in YUL is my guess?
You're good. Then again, my location does say YUL.....Pretty easy to deduce the rest from there.

airway wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:56 pm
thenoflyzone wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 7:27 pm
Quick question.

TS A321. CATI ILS on a runway with HIALS but no CL. What is the minimum RVR required to fly the approach and attempt a landing?
At Jazz:

ILS CAT I:
1200 RVR with HUD
1800 RVR without HUD


LPV/LNAV/VNAV or any Non Precision Approach:
2400 RVR at the lowest (variables that can raise that though)
Wow. Besides the 1200ft with HUD, those are pretty restrictive compared to other Canadian operators.

GoHomeLeg wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 6:48 pm
thenoflyzone wrote:
Thu Feb 13, 2020 7:27 pm
Quick question.

TS A321. CATI ILS on a runway with HIALS but no CL. What is the minimum RVR required to fly the approach and attempt a landing?

What airport?

And was it a c- registration?
YUL

All TS A321s are C- registered.
---------- ADS -----------
  
us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record ! We haven't left one up there yet !

bcflyer
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1181
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:35 am
Location: Canada

Re: Approach ban

Post by bcflyer » Wed Feb 19, 2020 5:49 am

24L YUL. AC A319/320/321 limited to 1800 RVR.
To be honest I’ve never been able to figure out how airlines get authorization to go below the published visibility. If the designers of the approach say you need 2600RVR to do the approach safely, why would the regulating body say “naw, we’ll let certain guys go lower than that”? Perfect example of it biting people in the ass: AC in YHZ. Without the ops spec that accident doesn’t happen.
---------- ADS -----------
  

derateNO
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 288
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2020 10:15 pm

Re: Approach ban

Post by derateNO » Wed Feb 19, 2020 3:26 pm

Jazz's visibility chart is the same or very close to AC's.

I was there when they implemented the new approach bans because of Halifax.

Keep in mind Jazz also can hand fly a CAT3 ILS all the way in with a DH of 50'
---------- ADS -----------
  

rxl
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 537
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:17 am
Location: Terminal 4

Re: Approach ban

Post by rxl » Thu Feb 20, 2020 9:01 am

bcflyer wrote:
Wed Feb 19, 2020 5:49 am
24L YUL. AC A319/320/321 limited to 1800 RVR.
To be honest I’ve never been able to figure out how airlines get authorization to go below the published visibility. If the designers of the approach say you need 2600RVR to do the approach safely, why would the regulating body say “naw, we’ll let certain guys go lower than that”? Perfect example of it biting people in the ass: AC in YHZ. Without the ops spec that accident doesn’t happen.
Maybe because the charted approach limits are set for the lowest common denominator in terms of equipment and experience. Someone in a 60 year old 172 with old avionics and flight instruments and a brand new PPL and IFR rating could potentially be flying the approach to limits on a gusty day. Don’t OPS Specs recognize that airlines generally have better equipment, training, operational control and more experience? ... Or maybe I should say used to have more experience.
---------- ADS -----------
  

co-joe
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3551
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 2:33 am
Location: YYC 230 degree radial at about 10 DME

Re: Approach ban

Post by co-joe » Mon Feb 24, 2020 7:03 pm

FICU wrote:
Fri Feb 14, 2020 5:06 pm
I think an RNAV LPV is still considered a "non precision" approach so the ILS CAT1 approach ban doesn't apply to it.
Bingo!

Weird but true. LPV is a non precision IAP, so 50% of advisory vis, whereas an ILS is a precision approach and limited by %75 of advisory vis.
---------- ADS -----------
  

vrefplus5
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:04 pm

Re: Approach ban

Post by vrefplus5 » Tue Feb 25, 2020 9:35 am

Bingo!

Weird but true. LPV is a non precision IAP, so 50% of advisory vis, whereas an ILS is a precision approach and limited by %75 of advisory vis.
Unless the runway has centreline lighting, then 50% advisory vis as well for the ILS. But you’re right, without it, it’s 75%.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “Air Transat”