The DH is 50 ft. The HGS 4000 has rollout guidance, however Alaska currently does not take credit for it. If they were to take credit for the rollout guidance the minimums would be 600/600/400 with a 50 foot DH.

Another advantage of having the ability to do a single engine CAT III approach is it usually also allows you to have lower takeoff alternate minimums. Therefore the airline can save money on fuel tankering by not having to have a takeoff alternate.

This may not sound worth the price of the system, but like others have said here on the west coast we get fog quite often. I'm looking out the window right now and can't see very far. I have done many CAT III approaches in my career, flying soley on the west coast. I have even had to hold twice when the weather went below 600 RVR in Seattle.

The other thing about the HUD is it is a great thing to use in every day flying. It is a great tool for precise aircraft control and allows your eyes to be out of the cockpit much more.

When I was on the 73 here at AA, we had to disconnect the Autopilot before 1,000' agl and hand fly the Cat 3 approach. I was told AS Alaska does them coupled. Is that correct?

Well. We can autoland, or handfly with the autopilot disconnected by 500'.

By the way, the RVR in SEA is currently 600/600/600!

I'm Miami based, we don't even have Cat 2 approaches here. We get 5 days of fog per year. Only lasts a couple hours.

ALL CAT II or greater approaches at CAL are monitored/coupled/autoland. I'd just as soon it stays that way since my eyes aren't quite as good as they used to be. ;)

We were/are discussing the HUD here. And each airline is slightly different when it comes to coupled/autoland w/out the HUD.
At AA on 75/76 Cat 2 are recommended autoland. Cat 3 required.

I was just trying to ask a couple Alaska pilots questions.

Although the HGS is a great tool for flying single engine ILS approaches, Alaska is only authorized to fly Cat I approaches single engine. The need for a takeoff alternate is based on departure field weather, if it is below Cat I an alternate is needed. The HGS is easier (read, cheaper) to maintain but sometimes after flying all night and faced with a Cat III approach its is nice to let the autoland do its thing and monitor it in the HGS. Both are great options to have.

Right. My point was that operators that are approved for CAT III single engine appoaches are usually also authorized to use lower than CAT I minimums at the departure airport to determine takeoff minimums. Horizon has this provision for the Q400.