A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

CAT IIIC minimums



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #8  
Old August 7th 06, 02:37 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Jim Carter[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 403
Default CAT IIIC minimums





-----Original Message-----


From: Gary Drescher ]


Posted At: Monday, August 07, 2006 8:13 AM


Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr


Conversation: CAT IIIC minimums


Subject: CAT IIIC minimums




"Jim Carter" wrote in message


news:001c01c6b9e5$41b26ee0$4001a8c0@omnibook6100.. .


The lowest authorized ILS minimums, with all required ground and

airborne

systems components operative, are


....

I found ... on page 5-49 of the Instrument Procedures Handbook at





http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/a...ocedures_handb

oo

k/




....



No, NA means "not authorized". See



http://www.naco.faa.gov/content/naco..._IAP_Intro.pdf
,

p.


53. (Also, Jeppesen's Instrument/Commercial Manual, Appendix B, lists

NA

as


an abbreviation for "not authorized".)




The material you cited above is entirely consistent with the "not


authorized" meaning.






Gary,

I pulled up the pdf file you supplied as reference and had adobe
search for the "not authorized" phrase. There is only one instance found
under the Alternate Minimums paragraph on page 53: "If NA appears,
alternate minimums are not authorized due to unmonitored facility or
absence of weather reporting service." I did not reference Jeppesen
because they are not the authority for this information.



Could this be a case of NA meaning one thing for CAT IIIc and
something else for other purposes? It probably would have made more
sense if the visibility requirement was shown as not required or
inapplicable.



How could an approach be authorized if the visibility requirement
is "not authorized"?





There is no CAT IIIc approach into JFK for runway 4R




Sorry, can you say how you arrived at that conclusion?






There is no CAT IIIc minima listed on the plate even though there is CAT
IIIa and b.





which is why it is not listed on the plate.




Couldn't it be unlisted because there are no DA or RVR limitations to


list?




--Gary




No, then it would be an unpublished approach wouldn't it? The definition
of CAT IIIc is zero/zero (more explicit language is found in my original
reference). The approach would be listed on the JFK plate if it was
approved and published. The EWS plate lists all three approach minima.




 




Thread Tools
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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Alternate minimums same as forecast weather [email protected] Instrument Flight Rules 17 February 21st 06 10:45 PM
Middle Marker minimums S Herman Instrument Flight Rules 5 June 9th 05 05:28 PM
Canadian departure minimums? Derrick Early Instrument Flight Rules 3 August 9th 04 01:43 PM
Skymap IIIC Mounting Options NW_PILOT Owning 15 July 8th 04 01:41 PM
Personal Weather Minimums FryGuy Piloting 26 December 9th 03 06:09 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.