NZFF

A question occured to me ... I just read Tony Vallilo's Golden Argosy series again, he had to perform an autolanding in Rome because the plane has to do one every 60 days, and he made the comment that a 767 can autoland on any ILS equipped runway.

A 767 is not exactly state of the art bleeding edge technology.

Auckland doesn't have anything awkward like offset localisers, so why does Ohakea fill up with Boeings when NZAA get closed for fog ? It sounds from reading Tony's article like they're more than capable of an autolanding in Auckland in fog.

Cheers
Gary

With Autoland, there are different Catagories. Depending on the Catagory, you still have to have Visual at mabye 80 feet, 100 feet etc depending on the CAT.

With CATIIIC Autoland, there is no Visual Hight therefore can land in any conditions. Auckland currently does not have this system, but it is being put in Place currently I beleive.

Autoland has been around for along time. The first autoland was carried out by a Hawker Siddeley Trident at Heathrow on the 10 June 1965.

Today it's not so much the technology that's an issue but more so the rules. The equipment in Auckland is certified to CAT3B which is zero ceiling and 75m forward visibility.

To achieve this there has had to be special procedures implemented for low visibility operations. Currently NZAA has no ground radar so you can't have half a dozen aircraft on the move at the same time.
The ILS equipment had to operate effectively on test for 12 months to ensure that it functions correctly, which it does.
At the moment all we are waiting for is the stop bars on the taxiways to be finished and NZAA will be CAT3B

Just to make sure that we are not getting confused here:

Autoland is different to ILS, but in the case of the CATIIIC they work hand in hand. The ILS is a system where aircraft can make a precision approach, and at minimums the pilot disengages the autopilot and manually flares the aircraft for touchdown. Where as in an autoland, the aircraft's autopilot system will do everything mentioned above. The reason the ANZ 767's dont autoland is because the pilots are not certified to carry one out from what I believe, as it is not worth the cost of keeping current on the procedure.

Auckland is fully CATIII capable now, and the stop bars are now installed. The only thing missing is the ground radar from what I believe, but AKL can still operate at a reduced capacity without it.

~KAG~

Autoland is a function of the aircraft, the ILS is the nav aid on the ground. CAT1 is the standard ILS down to a 200 foot minima and this is what we use at NZAA and NZCH every day. To be able to use a lower minma such as CAT2 or 3 the aircraft, crew and the ILS equipment must be certified to the lower minima.
NZAA is currently not fully operational due the stop bars. This is covered by notam B1554 which at this stage is valid till the end of may.

...And the categories just show the accuracy of the ILS equipment.

Category II is more accurate than a Cat. I system, and Cat. III more accurate than a Cat. II.

Alex

Thanks everyone, I await the first foggy day of the season with interest

Cheers
Gary

It happened last night for the first time just before midnight, runway visual range went down to 250m.
ANZ186 (B777) autolanded, PBI188 missed on a CAT1 approach and diverted NZCH. NZ650 , QFA39 and ourselves made it in on CAT1 approaches.

Cool ! Sounds like there is a bit of disruption there this morning though, and looking out the window the fog is rolling back in here in West Auckland. We need more 777s ! :-)

Just as a related thought, for what it's worth, we used to live on Herald Island which is next to Whenuapai. Kauri Rd where it runs alongside the airbase (including the end of the main runway) regularly had worse fog than anywhere else I've lived - visibility 7 to 10 metres.

Gary

SA227, your an airline pilot?

benwynn wrote:

QUOTE (benwynn @ Apr 28 2008, 10:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

SA227, your an airline pilot?

Hi Benn - Wild guess it's Andrew Moseley

Jamie

Just read the same on VATNZ with a few extras, I think you could be correct Jamie..