737NG Pilots...
11-08-2007 | 08:04 AM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
From: 737 FO
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.
11-08-2007 | 08:12 AM
#42
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
From: 737 FO
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.
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.
11-09-2007 | 07:02 AM
#46
HOSED BY PBS AGAIN
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,713
Likes: 0
11-09-2007 | 12:29 PM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
From: 737 CA MIA
At AA on 75/76 Cat 2 are recommended autoland. Cat 3 required.
I was just trying to ask a couple Alaska pilots questions.
11-10-2007 | 07:34 AM
#48
New Hire
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
From: Window
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.
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.
11-10-2007 | 08:22 AM
#49
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
From: 737 FO
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.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
