Sydney Airport Message Board Sydney Airport Message Board  

Go Back   Sydney Airport Message Board > Technical > Flying and Technical Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 6th May 2009, 08:55 AM
Owen H Owen H is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 365
Default

Hi Will,

Its odd isn't it! Same applies for London. That said, I believe BA have 0' minima for their 744's, so I guess we're a bit primative in this part of the world! haha.

The sooner Melbourne gets its cat II or III the better really!
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 6th May 2009, 10:56 AM
Michael Mak Michael Mak is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 451
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Owen H View Post
The sooner Melbourne gets its cat II or III the better really!
I remember from reading last year that Melbourne is getting ILS cat IIIa/b installed and should be ready for opereation sometime this year.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 6th May 2009, 11:11 AM
Mick F Mick F is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: NSW
Posts: 852
Default

Will or Owen, might be able to help.

While reading through the Head Office NOTAM's the other day (and the week before and the week before, etc.), I noticed this NOTAM:

AD FROM: 12 010615 TO: PERM YMMM C7899/08 REVIEW C7078/08
A380 OPERATIONS
EXCEPT AT YSSY, YBBN AND YMML, WHERE SPECIFIC CALCULATIONS HAVE BEEN
CONFIRMED, A380 PILOTS MUST USE LOC MDA IN LIEU OF PUBLISHED ILS DA
REF AIP DAP EAST AND WEST

Why can't the A380 use the ILS DA? I would have thought the minima is the same for everyone (of the same category of course)?

Mick
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 6th May 2009, 12:33 PM
Will T Will T is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 175
Default

Mike, I believe that's because the ILS Decisions Alts have only been surveyed for Category D aircraft, except at those specific airports mentioned. I'm sure that Cat E surveys will be carried out in due course for the remaining airports/runways that are A380-capable.

I'm sure someone else out there will be able to add further information?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 6th May 2009, 12:56 PM
NickN NickN is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,394
Default

Will would the 0ft RA at Auckland be due to the Autoland capabilities of the Airbus aircraft? From memory Airbus aircraft can still perform an Autoland from an altitude of 100ft and under with no G/S (the aircraft uses inertial reference to set the aircraft on the tarmac) and from 20ft and under (maybe 10ft? cant quite recall) with no LOC signal so perhaps that has something to do with it?
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 6th May 2009, 01:16 PM
Mick F Mick F is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: NSW
Posts: 852
Default

Will, even Sydney doesn't have Cat E on the ILS though.

Unless they've needed to resurvey it for Cat D?

And Nick, Boeing aircraft are also capable of Autoland.

Cheers

Mick
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 6th May 2009, 01:21 PM
Chris Roope Chris Roope is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 32
Default

Nick the 0ft RA is an Airbus thing not an Auckland thing.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 6th May 2009, 01:24 PM
Will T Will T is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 175
Default

Mike, if you mean the charts don't show a dedicated Cat E minima, then you're right. But I believe the 'specific calculations' referred to in that NOTAM are the results of a survey conducted at those specific airports, which allows them to use the full Category D minima, even though they're technically Category E.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 6th May 2009, 01:35 PM
Owen H Owen H is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 365
Default

I know less about it than Will (as usual!), but I can remember the initial notams restricted the A380 to LOC minimas except for at Sydney, but they have clearly now done the surveys for Brissie and Melbourne too.

I guess whenever you have such a large new aircraft, with different geometry etc, you will need to confirm that the installations are suitable for that aircraft.

NickN, it would also be an operator thing. As I said before, BA use 0ft as the minima on their 744's... just depends what you can convince the regulator and manufacturer to give you I suppose!

For all intents and purposes, however, 20ft and 0ft are the same thing... if you can't see the runway at 20ft you are unlikely to have the required 100m (75 for the 'bus) visibility anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 6th May 2009, 02:24 PM
NickN NickN is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,394
Default

Mick, I understand Boeing have autoland, just not familiar with the limitations of the system.

Quote:
NickN, it would also be an operator thing. As I said before, BA use 0ft as the minima on their 744's... just depends what you can convince the regulator and manufacturer to give you I suppose!

For all intents and purposes, however, 20ft and 0ft are the same thing... if you can't see the runway at 20ft you are unlikely to have the required 100m (75 for the 'bus) visibility anyway.
Your right Owen, was just putting the suggestion forward to see if it was related thats all.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time now is 01:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright © Sydney Airport Message Board 1997-2022
Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the Conditions of Use and Privacy Statement