Par 6 Page 83
d. Differences in application of the approach ban between U.S. airports and non-U.S. airports stems from the recognition that there may be differences in non-U.S. and U.S. methods to determine and report weather conditions.
On a worldwide basis, differences exist in types and characteristics of meteorological devices used, measurement techniques and policies, or processes for categorizing, reporting, or disseminating weather (e.g., different methods of determining and reporting RVR or meteorological visibility).
e. An approach ban is applicable at U.S. airports. It may also apply at airports in countries outside the United States where that state or airport authority specifically precludes “look-see” authorization when weather is below minima. Operators should be familiar with such policies of states outside the United States, or for non-US airports, and appropriately apply those states or airports policies.
f. 14 CFR and FAA policies require that for airports within the United States and its territories (e.g., Puerto Rico) or at U.S. military airports (e.g., airports at which U.S. military forces manage the facility or have a designated U.S. base or facility) it is necessary to have reported weather at a value at or above landing minima prior to initiating an approach (section 121.651).
g. The latest weather report from the most reliable source is considered to be the applicable controlling weather report as follows:
(1) Report from a co-located Air traffic Facility (e.g., Tower Local Control, Approach control), or
(2) ATIS Report, or
(3) Airline or FSS report from NWS or an approved source
6.2.9. Approach Operations at Non-U.S. Airports, when Weather is Reported “Below Minima.” This paragraph describes the regulatory basis for executing an instrument approach procedure (IAP) at a non-U.S. airport when it is previously known that the weather at that airport may be, or is below the charted weather minima or approach ban weather criteria for that IAP.
a. When an aircraft approaches an airport, a decision typically must be made whether or not to initiate the approach and whether it is permissible to proceed beyond the FAF or FAP on an IAP, based on specified “approach minima.”
b. These criteria are not necessarily the same as the charted criteria at the bottom of the approach plate, since in ICAO compliant publications, some States set approach minimums for an IAP by specifying an “approach ban” at weather minima different than that specified on the approach plate or OpSpecs for continuing below or beyond DA(H) or MDA(H).
c. The approach initiation minimums for an IAP may or may not be the same as the landing minimums shown on the IAP.
d. The following criteria are considered to apply as noted below (reference 14 CFR sections 91.703, 121.11,
135.3, 135.225, 125.23, 125.381).
(1) Operations Specifications: Always apply, domestic and international.
(2) State of the Aerodrome criteria if promulgated as rules or regulations: Typically always apply in the national airspace of that state, as an agreed sovereign right.
(3) 14 CFR parts 121, 125, or 135 always apply to domestic operations, and always apply internationally unless the State of the Aerodrome specifically prohibit use of a particular part or provision of 14 CFR, or promulgates a rule contradicting a regulation, and the FAA agrees to apply the overriding provision of the State of the Aerodrome rather than the regulation. Typically State of the Aerodrome provisions may be more restrictive than the regulation, but may not provide relief from a U.S. regulation that applies to international operation.
Page 84 Par 6
(a) Section 121.651, 125.381 and 135.225 address approach minimums. A weather report for that airport is required prior to commencing an IAP. This is required worldwide.
(b) Reported visibility is required to be at least as good as the “visibility minimums prescribed for that approach” prior to commencing an IAP. This visibility requirement applies to airports in the United States, its territories, and U.S. military airports (whether in the United States or outside the United States), and to any airport in a foreign country where the country’s operating rules require that the prescribed visibility be available prior to commencing the approach.
(c) Parts 121, 135, and 125 allow the crew to continue an IAP to DA(H) or MDA(H) if a below minimums weather report is received while already on the final segment of the approach.
(d) Part 121 allows an ILS Category I Procedure to be conducted with below minimums weather if both the ILS and a PAR are used simultaneously by the pilot. This does not apply to an operator not authorized for use of PAR, since that operator may not train for PAR approaches.
(e) Accordingly, there is no requirement for an above minimums weather report to commence an IAP in a foreign State (e.g., using a weather source other than the NWS or a source approved by the NWS) unless FAA has specifically precluded use of the look-see provision for a particular State or States. (Note: The State of the Aerodrome or Airport may additionally preclude such below minima operations, and U.S. Operators are expected to abide by such provisions, unless otherwise approved by FAA (e.g., through an emergency authorization in time of conflict or natural disaster).
(4) ICAO Standards apply over the high seas (international airspace), and in the airspace of a State which adheres to the ICAO Convention, subject to modification by that State, or ICAO filed “Difference.” ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices (e.g., ICAO Annex 2, Annex 6, and PANS-OPS) do not address “approach minimums,” or any particular weather criteria applying to the decision whether to initiate or continue an IAP. (Also see “ICAO Manual of All Weather Operations” DOC 9365 AN/910.)
(5) Part 91 always applies to domestic operations unless superseded by part 121, 125, or 135 provisions.
Internationally certain provisions of part 91 apply when not otherwise superseded by part 121, ICAO, or State of the Aerodrome rules. Section 91.175 does not specifically address minimums related to initiation of an approach, or any weather criteria for initiating an IAP. All references are to landing minimums and the required visual references to continue below DA(H) or MDA(H). For operators conducting operations under part 91 (e.g., training, ferry, aircraft functional flight test), the approach ban provisions of part 121, 125, or 135 may thus not necessarily apply if the particular operation is considered to be conducted under part 91 by the CMO. Also, for flight test and POC demonstration purposes, waivers to provisions of section 91.175 may be requested from FAA (e.g., such as to authorize limited use of reduced weather minima for test or evaluation purposes).
6.2.10. IFR Approaches or Low Visibility Takeoffs in Class G Airspace. An operator may be authorized to conduct IFR approaches to Category I or Category II minima, or low visibility takeoffs, in Class G airspace, if the requirements of the applicable OpSpecs are met.
a. Nonscheduled Operations. For nonscheduled operations, the CHDO must ensure that the operator's Category I or II operations program provides the policy, and direction and guidance necessary to safely conduct these operations. The CHDO must also ensure that the certificate holder's manuals cover the specific procedures which must be used, and the facilities and services which must be available and operational for the safe conduct of instrument approach operations in Class G airspace (e.g., weather reporting, advisory frequencies, and NAVAID critical area protection, as applicable).
b. Scheduled Operations. In addition to meeting the requirements for nonscheduled operations, the CHDO must ensure that the facilities and services necessary for the safe conduct of instrument approach procedures in Class G airspace are available during the times of scheduled operations, and are specified in the OpSpecs.
Par 6 Page 85
c. Method of Approval. The authorizations to conduct instrument approach procedures in Class G airspace are addressed by issuing Special Non-14 CFR part 97 OpSpecs.
6.2.11. Wind Constraint Applicability. When wind constraints apply to Category I or Category II procedures
(e.g., an OpSpec 15 knot crosswind component limit) the limit is considered to apply to the point of touchdown. If a report of a crosswind component value greater than the limit is received while on approach, an aircraft may continue an approach, but a subsequent wind report indicating winds are within limits or a pilot determination that actual winds are within limits must be made prior to touchdown.
a. The flightcrew should use the most recent, reliable and appropriate information. Acceptable methods for a wind determination may include ATS reports, reports of other aircraft with reliable means of wind determination (e.g., IRS), pilot use of on-board IRS or FMS wind readout capability, data link of recent winds, or pilot confirmation of an acceptable visual indication of winds on the surface by a wind sock, wind indicator or equivalent wind indicating device.
b. When an Airplane Flight Manual or other manufacturer’s reference (e.g., FCOM) references “Maximum wind component speeds when landing weather minima are predicated on autoland operations,” or an equivalent statement, an operator or flightcrew may consider those wind values to apply to “steady state” wind components.
c. It is considered acceptable for the flightcrew to land when gust values are reported to exceed the steady state wind limit if the flightcrew considers the gust exceedance to be:
• insignificant in magnitude
• variable in direction
• occasional, or
• the wind report is not applicable (e.g., obviously outdated, measured at a location considered too far from the runway or touchdown zone, or gusts considered not pertinent during the period of touchdown or rollout.)
6.2.12. Crosswind Component Determination at Airports with Significant Magnetic Variation (Polar Regions). Operators, flightcrews, and dispatchers (if applicable) of air carriers operating in polar regions or having ETOPS or EROPS alternates in these polar regions should be familiar with appropriate methods to determine wind components and particularly tailwind and crosswind components at airports with significant magnetic variation, or with runways oriented to true north. Due to METAR, TAF, and ATS Tower reported winds and runways potentially having different magnetic or true north reference, caution must be exercised where significant magnetic variation values exist, to correctly determine applicable crosswind and tailwind component limits.
6.2.13. Unusual or Extreme Temperatures or Pressures.
6.2.13.1. General Cold Temperature Considerations. Appropriate “cold temperature” altitude adjustments for instrument procedure minimum segment altitudes (e.g., initial or intermediate segments) should be made when altitude errors resulting from unusually cold airport surface temperatures are considered significant, and are needed to ensure terrain or obstacle clearance. Instrument procedure designers, airspace planners, Authorities, Air Traffic Service (ATS), Operators or pilots may make appropriate corrections, as necessary. Altitude errors typically may be considered significant in mountainous regions when surface temperatures are below -22F/-30C, when significant terrain or obstacle clearance is a factor, and when temperature considerations have not otherwise been addressed by instrument procedure design. Flightcrews should not additionally make corrections if instrument procedures already address temperature related terrain or obstacle clearance to the degree necessary, or if ATS has addressed cold temperature considerations in their assigned clearance altitudes. Use of any altitude corrections made by flightcrews should be consistent with ATS cold temperature altitude correction policies when such policies are promulgated, and when safe clearance is ensured by those ATS policies. (Also see paragraphs 4.3.1.1 item g, 4.3.4. item c., 7.1.3.
items d, and 8, 8.13, and 8.14 for related information).
Page 86 Par 6
6.2.13.2. Temperatures Below Those Used in Procedure Design. In some countries, cold temperature errors are considered during procedure design, and are addressed in published instrument procedures, MEAs, and Air Traffic Service (ATS) minimum clearance altitudes such as MVAs when necessary. If temperatures are significantly below the reference temperature considered during procedure design, it may be appropriate for pilots or Operators to apply altitude corrections to the specified (published or charted) procedure minimum altitudes while in flight. This may be done using an appropriate altitude correction table as provided in Table 6.2.13-1 below, or through an equivalent table or method, to ensure terrain or obstacle clearance.
6.2.13.3. Segments which may need to be Corrected for Temperature. Altitude corrections are particularly important on initial or intermediate approach segments in areas of mountainous terrain when there is a significant difference between true altitude and indicated altitude due to unusually cold surface temperatures. Additionally, the size of any temperature-induced altitude or height error decreases in magnitude as the height above the airport surface decreases. Corrections may also be appropriate for MEAs, MVAs, “driftdown” flight paths in mountainous terrain, or missed approach or takeoff flight paths, when extreme cold temperature effects are not otherwise considered. When a U.S. Air Traffic Facility, or international ATS facility already considers cold temperature effects in clearances, additional corrections by flightcrews should not normally be made (e.g., for a radar vector altitude clearance).
6.2.13.4. Uncorrected Procedures. In certain states, cold temperature correction may need to be applied any time temperature is below ISA (e.g., Canada, Northern Europe, when using ICAO criteria). When flying to such states, it is important for the operator and pilots to be aware of that state’s cold temperature instrument procedure correction policy, and to operate consistent with that policy. This may be accomplished by an operator applying that state’s policy, or by the operator using the operator’s own policy, if that policy provides for safe clearance and is suitable for use within that state (e.g., the operator’s altitude correction policy for cold temperature is compatible with that state’s ATS procedures or requirements).
6.2.13.5. VNAV Path and Visual Guidance (VGSI) Temperature Considerations. Pilots and Operators should be aware that temperature-related effects on VNAV path formulation can occur when operating well below or above ISA. For example, in extreme cold temperatures, VNAV descent gradients may be more shallow than usual and visual aids (e.g., VGSI, VASI, PAPI) may not necessarily show “on path” indications when visual reference is first acquired, even though the aircraft is correctly flying the FMS-indicated VNAV path. In such cases, pilots should be alert for the need to adjust and ensure a safe flight path. Similarly, pilots and operators should be aware that unusually shallow VNAV gradients could be lower than “step down” crossing altitudes if temperature considerations have not been addressed. For temperatures well above ISA, VNAV descent angles may be correspondingly steeper than nominal. While obstacle clearance would not be an issue, aircraft descent gradient capability could be a factor if operating near descent gradient limits for the aircraft (e.g., with unusual tailwind conditions at altitude, or with reduced flap settings with an engine inoperative).
6.2.13.6. Unusual Cold Temperature Operations within the Unites States. Within the United States, cold temperature factors and related altitude additives should be considered by procedure designers when necessary (e.g., during procedure design) or are considered by airspace planners to the extent necessary (e.g., when establishing MVAs in cold climates and mountainous areas). However, since assessments for cold temperature correction may vary for particular procedures or situations, if an operator has questions as to the suitability of a particular procedure in extreme cold conditions. Operators may consult the appropriate FAA procedure design office through their respective POI or CMO to determine what additional precautions or adjustments may be appropriate in extreme cold temperature conditions, if any.
6.2.13.7. Unusual Cold Temperature Operations Outside of the Unites States.
a. It is particularly important to note these temperature effects when operating outside of the Unites States. Not all states necessarily address temperature compensation within instrument procedure development or in airspace procedure planning. If a flightcrew or operator is in doubt regarding safe obstacle clearance, additional margin should be provided (e.g., requested from ATS, if applicable). Operators may elect to coordinate with authorities or ATS facilities in countries outside of the Unites States which have unusually cold temperatures to determine which procedure-specified altitudes include extreme cold temperature considerations, if any, and which do not. If a pilot is
Par 6 Page 87 in doubt as to safe altitude clearance, corrections should be considered and applied, and ATS should be advised of the use of corrected altitudes, if applicable.
b. Where temperature constraints are placed on instrument approach procedures, operators and pilots should be familiar with and properly apply those constraints. Pilots and operators should also be familiar with any temperature correction table(s) provided by the “State of the Aerodrome” (ICAO) or aircraft manufacturer. For FMS, pilots should be familiar with any temperature correction methods that apply to proper FMS use, if provided.
6.2.13.8. Use of Standard Cold Temperature Correction Table (Table 6.2.13-1). Extreme cold temperature corrections may be made within the United States, or by U.S. operators when flying internationally, IAW the standard temperature correction table shown in Table 6.2.13-1, or through an equivalent table. International operators flying to the Unites States (e.g., part 129) may use methods acceptable to the authority of the State of the operator, or methods equivalent to those found acceptable for U.S. operators by FAA.
a. Table 6.2.13-1 provides altitude correction values in feet, related to reported airport surface temperature, to be added to various published instrument procedure-related altitudes. The amount of altitude correction to be applied depends on the height of the published segment above the airport.
b. For example, using Table 6.2.13-1, an altitude correction of 280 ft. would apply for (see highlighted values in Table 6.2.13-1):
(1) a reported airport surface temperature of -30C, and
(2) a published instrument procedure segment altitude of 1500 ft. above the airport elevation,
6.2.13.9. Use of Other Cold Temperature Correction Tables. In the event that different cold temperature altitude correction table(s) or methods are provided by a “State of the Aerodrome,” an aircraft manufacturer, ICAO, another authority for that State, or by the operator (e.g., simplified table(s) or methods), pilots or operators may use that alternate table or method in lieu of Table 6.2.13-1. The alternate table(s) or methods should, however, ensure suitable terrain and obstacle clearance, and its use must be compatible with any applicable ATS procedure or clearance.
6.2.13.10. Altimeter Settings. Pilots and operators should be familiar with the proper altimeter settings to use and should take necessary precautions to switch altimeter settings at appropriate times or locations, considering possible multiple sources for altimeter settings including ATS-issued altimeter settings, company or airport reported settings, or settings broadcast over ATIS, or automated settings received by radio based on AWOS, or ASOS.
6.2.13.11. Altimeter Settings (Not Recent). Pilots and Operators should also take necessary precautions when using altimeter settings that may not be recent, or settings from remote locations, or rapidly varying settings, particular at times when pressure is reported or is expected to be rapidly decreasing.
6.2.13.12. Precautions for Unusually High or Low Temperatures or High or Low Pressures. Aircraft performance or procedure adjustments may need to be considered for unusually high or low temperatures or high or low pressures (e.g., temperatures or pressures above or below available AFM data). In such situations, operators may need to request suitable additional information or AFM provisions from the manufacturer, if temperatures or pressures exceed available AFM information or limitations. Data may be provided by the aircraft manufacturer or other approved source (e.g., if the aircraft manufacturer no longer exists or does not support the aircraft type) for such unusual temperatures or surface pressures. In addition to acquiring the necessary data and revised limitations, these situations can also be an important additional consideration for go-around or missed approach assessment.
Page 88 Par 6 Table 6.2.13-1 Cold Temperature Altitude Corrections Note: Values are to be added to published altitudes.
Arpt Temp (°°°°C) Height Above Altimeter Source (feet) 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1500 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 20 20 30 30 40 40 50 50 60 90 120 170 230 290 -10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 150 200 290 390 490 -20 30 50 60 70 90 100 120 130 140 210 280 430 570 710 -30 40 60 80 100 120 130 150 170 190 280 380 570 760 950 -40 50 80 100 120 150 170 190 220 240 360 480 720 970 1210 -50 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 450 600 890 1190 1500
6.2.14. Metric Altitudes. When used, the operator should address appropriate flightcrew and dispatch procedures for identification of and appropriate setting and use of altimeters, altitude alert systems, and altitude reference bugs for metric altitude use. This should include emphasis on distinguishing appropriate use of metric versus non-metric units for altimeter settings, change over points, and callouts as used by that operator, and as applicable to the metric altitude routes and procedures used.
6.2.15. International “Approach Procedure Title” Requirements for or Limitations on NAVAID Use. The operator should address appropriate flightcrew and dispatch procedures (if applicable) for identification of and appropriate use of international approach procedures which may or may not have all necessary NAVAIDs listed in the “procedure title” (e.g., NDB ILS Runway 16). For some of these procedures, NAVAIDs may be required which are not necessarily shown in the procedure title. For these procedures the operator should ensure that appropriate airborne equipment is operating for dispatch (if applicable), and crews should verify that appropriate navigation equipment is operating to safely conduct the approach and missed approach. Where substitutions are approved for U.S. Operators (e.g., FMS based RNAV for NDB, VOR, or DME, or GPS for NDB) the operator should ensure flightcrews are familiar with substitutions allowable for that region, state, or procedure.
6.2.16. “U.S. TERPS” or “ICAO PANS-OPS” Obstacle Clearance Procedural Protection Limitations. The operator should be aware that U.S. Standards for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) and ICAO PANS-OPS-based instrument procedures principally address normal operations, including flight above DA(H) or MDA(H), and above any specified or assumed climb gradients. Operations in non-normal configurations or at unusual speeds (e.g., operations with an engine inoperative, particularly for twin engine aircraft, or in unusual flap or flight control configurations) do not necessarily ensure compliance with climb gradients assumed for TERPS or PANS-OPS-based standard procedures. Accordingly, operators, flightcrews, and dispatchers (if applicable) should consider any necessary aircraft type specific or weight/altitude/temperature (WAT) specific procedures (e.g., similar to takeoff procedures) that may be necessary to ensure safe obstacle clearance, for at least the following situations:
a. Engine failure prior to initiation of or during approach or missed approach,
b. Balked landing or go-around from below DA(H) or MDA(H) (e.g., as for inadvertent loss of visual reference)
Par 6 Page 89
c. Any special precautions that may be needed if a crew follows a published missed approach procedure or ATS instruction for a turn from below DA(H) or MDA(H), and before climbing to a safe altitude protected by the procedure or MVA,
d. Any necessary consideration of an associated “IFR departure procedure” as an aid to ensure safe obstacle clearance, if initiating a go-around from below DA(H), MDA(H), or during a circling approach,
e. Any special limitations that may be necessary for safe operations into section 121.445 designated airports.(e.g., Reno, NV [KRNO]).
6.2.17. Navigation Reference Datum Compatibility (e.g.,WGS-84/Other Datum). Outside the Unites States, it is important for operators using FMS, GPS, and RNAV to be aware of, and where necessary, take precautions to address potential differences in the Navigation Data Base (NDB) “reference datum” used by their aircraft’s navigation system, and the datum used locally by States for aeronautical data (e.g., NAVAID locations, runway waypoint locations) and specification of instrument procedures.
a. This is important to preclude significant navigation errors. If not appropriately addressed, the actual position of the aircraft may significantly differ from the indicated position. Aircraft may experience incorrect FMS position updating, may fly to an incorrect geographic location for a waypoint, NAVAID, or runway, may violate obstacle clearance during approach or missed approach, or may complete an instrument procedure displaced from the airport or runway intended. Significant map shifts can occur if FMS position estimates are based on use of a NAVAID using a different reference datum than the aircraft’s NDB presumes. Similarly, GPS stand alone systems, while accurately flying to locations specified in a WGS-84 coordinate frame, may not necessarily fly the path over the ground intended by the procedure if the specification of that path uses a datum significantly different than WGS-84.
This also can be important when flying with a navigation data base using WGS-84 as the basis for a procedure, but the aircraft is not using GPS or GPS updating, and is depending on local NAVAID updating with those NAVAIDs referenced to a different datum (e.g., as for a GPS inoperative MEL dispatch case with FMS).
b. For Category I or II procedures, the issue of use of an appropriate Navigation “Reference Datum” principally applies to flying procedures as follows:
• RNAV approach or missed approach procedures
• RNAV Initial or intermediate segments ILS or MLS procedures, or
• RNAV missed approach segments ILS or MLS procedures
c. The final approach segment of ILS or MLS typically is not adversely affected by a difference in reference datum.
d. GLS or RNP procedures, while depending on specification of an appropriate reference datum for final approach, are protected through other criteria to ensure consistent navigation.
e. Information about the Navigation Reference Datum used in a particular location outside of the United States is typically available on the Internet. An example of a web site containing this information is:
http://www.jeppesen.com/wgs84.html
f. Accordingly, when outside United States airspace and when WGS-84 is not used as the reference datum locally for NAVAID’s or procedures, or a reference datum equivalent to WGS-84 is not used, and RNAV segments are flown as part of an instrument approach or missed approach procedure for:
• FMS-equipped aircraft
• FMS-equipped aircraft using GPS updating, or
• GPS “stand alone” equipped aircraft
Page 90 Par 6 Operators should take suitable precautions, as described below:
(1) Aircraft Equipped With FMS Having GPS Updating Capability, or Equipped With “GPS Stand Alone” Navigation Systems.
(a) For aircraft having FMS capability with GPS updating, or a “GPS Stand Alone” navigation systems, for each approach outside the United States where the local datum is not WGS-84, or WGS-84 equivalent, or where the operator is uncertain as to whether the local datum is significantly different than WGS-84, the operator should take one or more of the following precautions, as necessary:
i. Verify that the datum is WGS-84, or equivalent, ii. Conduct an assessment of the difference in the datum used, to determine that any difference is not significant for the procedures to be flown, iii. Develop and use special RNAV procedure segments or aeronautical data referenced to WGS- 84 or equivalent, as necessary, iv. Manually inhibit GPS updating of the FMS while flying the approach, or segments of the approach affected by the difference in reference datum,
v. Only use FMS or GPS Stand Alone systems to fly pertinent RNAV segments of the approach where it is possible to use other NAVAID raw data to confirm correct aircraft position along the flight path, vi. Conduct simulation verification, or in-flight verification or confirmation of suitable navigation performance, vii. Preclude FMS or GPS use on segments of the approach affected by the difference in reference datum, or viii. Use any other method proposed by the operator, and found acceptable to FAA, to ensure that a difference in the NDB Reference Datum from the local datum does not cause loss of navigation integrity.
(b) For GLS or RNP procedures or procedure segments, since the reference datum is consistent with WGS-84 by procedure design, Operators of aircraft using GPS updating of FMS need not apply the special precautions listed above, unless otherwise advised (e.g., by NOTAM or equivalent).
(2) FMS Aircraft That Do Not Have GPS Updating Capability.
(a) While possible, FMS-equipped aircraft that do not have GPS updating capability may be less likely to experience this particular datum reference difference issue. This is because navigation databases, local NAVAIDs, and local instrument procedures typically address and resolve datum issues consistently on a local basis, and in a consistent manner within the locally used coordinate frame of reference. However, even though the datum difference issue may be less likely, it nonetheless may occur. Operators should apply precautions, as necessary, if there is significant doubt as to Navigation Data Base datum differences.
(b) The precautions listed above in item (1) should not be interpreted to discourage GPS installation and use. GPS updating of FMS can significantly increase both navigation accuracy and integrity, and reduce the risk of other types of navigation errors, including map shifts, yielding a significant safety increase.
6.2.18. Alternative Use of FAA/JAA Harmonized Minima. This AC provides for use of optional “FAA/JAA harmonized operating minima” when authorized by OpSpecs or an LOA, in lieu of otherwise published minima based on U.S. TERPS or ICAO PANS-OPS. Use of these minima is limited to use within the United States, within any JAA (European) State that authorizes use of these minima or equivalent, or in other States that accept or apply FAA or JAA criteria. These minima have been determined to be acceptable for use by U.S. Operators or JAA
Par 6 Page 91 supervised Operators within the United States who have implemented applicable provisions and criteria of Appendix 8, or its equivalent.
a. Minima based on values provided in Appendix 8 should not be below the lowest minima authorized through a Category I Standard OpSpecs authorization, or below any applicable published foreign aerodrome minima when operating outside the United States.
b. These minima provide for a single table for Aerodrome Operating Minima regardless of approach type, and are intended for use by aircraft and procedures which are based on a stabilised descent path to the runway (e.g., using an xLS glide slope, VNAV, or other specifically approved method for maintaining a constant vertical descent path or rate during final approach). Use of minima in this table for other procedures not using a glide slope or constant VNAV descent path to minima is considered only on a case-by-case basis by the FAA.
c. The harmonized minima are intended to cover all categories of straight-in approach procedures including xLS (e.g., ILS GLS, MLS) and approaches other than xLS (e.g., RNAV, LOC, BCRS, VOR, NDB). Any procedure based on U.S. TERPS or ICAO PANS-OPS, or special procedures otherwise approved by FAA are eligible to use these harmonized minima.
d. Approaches with glide slope angles or VNAV descent paths in excess of 3.77 degrees, or special procedures at certain airports that require specific knowledge or training, are not typically eligible for use of these special approach minima.
e. The FAA/JAA Harmonized Approach minima which may alternately be approved through OpSpecs for use by U.S. Operators, or JAA supervised Operators, or equivalent authority/operators determined acceptable by FAA
(e.g., Canada), are as listed in Appendix 8.
6.2.19. Assessment of Threshold Crossing Height (TCH), Approach Descent Gradient, and Runway Slope.
a. Operators should assess instrument procedures to be used at regular, alternate, and provisional airports, and at planned diversion contingency airports to ensure satisfactory Threshold Crossing Height (TCH) for the type of aircraft to be flown (see 5.12.3 and 5.12.4). Typically, TCHs of less than 48 ft. should not be used by wide body air carrier aircraft without special review by the operator.
b. Operators should assess instrument procedures to be used at regular, alternate, and provisional airports, and at planned diversion contingency airports to ensure that final approach descent gradients specified are appropriate for the type of aircraft to be flown, and for conditions expected to be encountered (e.g., engine-out flap settings and speeds, anti-ice operating). For facility, obstacle, or terrain constraints, certain airports served by air carrier aircraft have unusually steep gradients (Stephenville, Newfoundland. - CYJT) or unusually shallow gradients (Kodiak, Alaska - PADQ) that may have operational consequence for certain aircraft types.
c. Under extreme cold temperature conditions certain VNAV paths may be more shallow than normal, and under extreme high temperatures these VNAV paths may be steeper than normal (see paragraph 6.2.13). In either case the paths may not closely align with fixed visual aids such as VGSI/PAPI.
d. Certain runways have unusual general slope, or complex varying slope that should be assessed by the operator for pilot awareness, or for operational consequence (e.g., operator specifies that the aircraft must touchdown by a certain point on the runway, or the last portion of the runway is not visible during flare in the TDZ due to changing slope).
Page 92 Par 7
7. TRAINING AND CREW QUALIFICATION.
a. Training and crew qualification programs pertinent to Category I, Category II, or lower than standard takeoff minima should include appropriate ground training (e.g., knowledge assurance) and flight training (e.g., skill or maneuver experience in simulation or an aircraft) to ensure safe aircraft operation for instrument procedures and low visibility operations in normal, rare normal (e.g., winds, turbulence, restricted visibility), and specified non-normal conditions (e.g., engine or various systems inoperative). Although training is not required for part 125, Operators are encouraged to prepare a training and qualification program for all flight crewmembers IAW this paragraph.
b. This is typically accomplished through appropriately addressing initial qualification, recurrent qualification, upgrade qualification, differences qualification, recency of experience, and re-qualification. The Operator’s program should provide appropriate training and qualification for each pilot in command (PIC), second in command (SIC) and any other pilot or flight crewmember expected to have knowledge of or perform duties related to Category I or Category II landing operations (e.g., Flight engineer, augmented flight crewmember).
c. Each PIC, and each other pilot or dispatcher, if applicable, having duties related to flight planning or use of Category I or Category II instrument procedures is expected to have comprehensive knowledge of areas described in paragraph 7.1 below. Each pilot expected to perform instrument procedures in normal or specified non-normal operations or perform duties associated with those procedures, should have successfully demonstrated the necessary skills in accomplishing those designated maneuvers or procedures as shown in paragraphs 7.2 through 7.4 below.
Demonstration of skill in performing instrument procedures typically is accomplished through simulator training, checking, or during line operating experience or evaluations. Pilots other than a PIC or SIC may only be expected to perform those relevant duties, procedures or maneuvers related to instrument procedures that are applicable to their own crew position or assigned duties (e.g., international relief officers).
7.1. General Knowledge (Ground) Training for All Weather Operations (AWO).
a. Appropriate ground training should be conducted suitable for the “All weather Operations,” instrument procedures, aircraft type(s) or variants, crew positions, airborne systems, NAVAIDs, and ground systems used.
b. Topics should be addressed to include at least those listed in paragraphs 7.1.1 through 7.1.3, and be addressed or tailored to suit application to initial qualification, recurrent qualification, re-qualification, upgrade, or differences qualification, as applicable.
c. Topics should be addressed for each PIC and any other pilots having assigned duties (e.g., SIC) as a PF or PNF during conduct of IAP. When duties are specifically assigned to a PF or PNF (e.g., monitored approach, Category II), only those duties applicable to the assigned crew position need be addressed for that crew position.
When instrument approach-related duties are specifically assigned to other than the PIC or SIC, such as a flight engineer or relief pilot duties applicable to the assigned crew position should be addressed. When flight crewmembers other than a PIC or SIC are not assigned duties associated with an IAP but are expected to be present on the flight deck during an instrument approach, it is recommended, but not required, that they also receive suitable academic training.
d. Acceptable methods to address ground training topics include classroom instruction, self guided slide/tape presentation, or computer-based instruction, or self-instruction using appropriate reference materials.
e. If the method of satisfying ground training requirements is exclusively through self guided learning or review from appropriate reference materials (e.g., flightcrew operating manual, Aeronautical Information Manual, and commercially available instrument procedure charts), the operator should use some clearly identified method (e.g., periodic written examination) to verify that each pilot has acquired or has retained the necessary knowledge.
Par 7 Page 93
7.1.1. Ground Systems and NAVAIDs for Category I or Category II.
a. Ground systems and NAVAIDs are considered to include characteristics of the airport, electronic navigation aids, lighting, marking, and other systems (e.g., RVR) and any other relevant information necessary for safe Category I or Category II landing or low visibility takeoff operations.
b. The training and qualification program should appropriately address the operational characteristics, capabilities and limitations of at least each of the following:
(1) NAVAIDs. The navigation systems or NAVAIDs to be used, such as the instrument landing system (ILS) with its associated critical area protection criteria, GPS Landing System (GLS), or Microwave Landing System (MLS) characteristics, as applicable, marker beacons, VOR, DME, NDB, DME, compass locators or other relevant systems should be addressed to the extent necessary for safe operations. If area navigation systems, or other nonground based NAVAID systems (e.g., GNSS, LORAN) are used, any characteristics or constraints regarding that method of navigation or associated supporting elements (e.g., GBAS, WAAS), must be addressed.
(2) Visual Aids. Visual aids include approach lighting system, TDZ, centerline lighting, runway edge lighting, taxiway lighting, standby power for lighting and any other lighting systems that might be relevant to a Category I or Category II environment, such as pilot control of lighting aids, or coding of the center line lighting for distance remaining, and lighting for displaced thresholds, land and hold short lighting, or other relevant configurations should be addressed.
(3) Runways and Taxiways. The runway and taxi way characteristics concerning width, safety areas, obstacle free zones, markings, hold lines, signs, holding spots, runway slope, suitability of TCH, unusual friction, grooving, or PFC characteristics, critical area protection areas, or taxi way position markings, runway distance remaining markings and runway distance remaining signs should be addressed.
(4) Meteorological Information. METARs, TAFs, visibility reporting, Transmissometers systems, including RVR locations, readout increments, sensitivity to lighting levels set for the runway edge lights, variation in the significance of reported values during international operations, controlling and advisory status of readouts, and requirements when transmissometers become inoperative; appropriate use of Temperatures in C or F, conversion of temperatures between C and F; appropriate use of pressure information including altimeter settings in units of HPa or inches, QNE, QNH, QFE (if applicable); appropriate use of Transition Level and Transition Altitude;
appropriate interpretation and use of reported wind and gust information, in true or magnetic direction, as applicable to the source and circumstance.
(5) NOTAMs and other Aeronautical Information. Facility status, proper interpretation of outage reports for lighting components, standby power, or other factors and proper application of NOTAMs regarding the initiation of Category I or Category II approaches or initiation of a low visibility takeoff.
(6) Flight Planning and Flight Procedures Related to Inoperative or Unsuitable NAVAIDs. When NAVAID position updating is used in support of area navigation position determination (e.g., VOR, VOR-DME, DME-DME, GNSS updating), Operators and flightcrews should be aware of when and how to disable use of an unsuitable NAVAID or updating method within the airborne navigation system. This is especially true for NAVAID failure conditions that are probable to cause a significant map (position) shift (e.g., movement of a NAVAID to a new location without corresponding update of the NAVAID position in a database, significant numbers of space vehicle outages, or areas of interference).
7.1.2. The Airborne System.
a. The training and qualification program should address the characteristics, capabilities, and limitations of each appropriate airborne system element applicable to Category I or Category II landing including the following:
Page 94 Par 7
(1) Flight guidance system. The flight guidance system, including appropriate modes to be used for different circumstances or procedures (e.g., APPROACH, HDG, V/S, LNAV/VNAV), and any associated landing system or landing and roll out system, or go-around capability, if applicable (e.g., autopilot, autoland);
(2) Flight director system. The flight director system, including appropriate modes to be used for different circumstances or procedures (e.g., APPROACH, HDG, V/S, LNAV/VNAV), and including any associated landing or landing and roll out capability, or go-around capability, if applicable (e.g., HGS);
(3) Automatic throttle. The automatic throttle control system, if applicable. Mixed mode autoflight/autothrottle operation should be addressed (e.g., manual flight, but with autothrottles on, or vice versa), if pertinent to the aircraft type,
(4) Displays. Situation information displays, as applicable, including any applicable limits for acceptable approach performance to continue an approach, flare, rollout, or go-around (e.g., typically 1/2 dot or less lateral or vertical displacement below 500 ft. HAT down to DA(H), and
(5) Status, Alerting and Warning Displays. Other associated instrumentation and displays, as applicable, including any monitoring displays, status displays, mode annunciation displays, failure or warning annunciations, and associated system status displays that may be relevant.
(6) Means for determining DA(H) or MDA(H). The means for determining DA(H) or MDA(H) as follows:
(a) DA(H) as applicable to the particular Category I ILS, GLS, or MLS procedure (e.g., as an applicable DA, or Marker Beacon substitute for a DA when authorized);
(b) DA(H) as applicable to the particular Category I RNAV or RNAV RNP procedure with VNAV
(e.g., as an applicable DA);
(c) MDA(H) as applicable to the particular Category I procedure other than ILS, GLS, or MLS (e.g., as an applicable MDA, and any associated missed approach point); and
(d) DA(H) as applicable to the particular Category II ILS, GLS, or MLS procedure (e.g., as an applicable DH, or Marker Beacon substitute for a DH, when authorized).
(7) Other Flight Deck Systems. Other flight deck systems operations or use, as may be related to low visibility operations (e.g., autobrakes, autospoilers), and any associated limitations, characteristics, or constraints
(e.g., touchdown pitch up or pitch down tendency of certain autospoiler or autobrake settings or non-normal conditions, time delays, auto-deactivation features with go-around).
(8) Other aircraft characteristics. Any system or aircraft characteristics that may be relevant to Category I or Category II operations, such as cockpit visibility cutoff angles and the effect on cockpit visibility of proper eye height, seat position or instrument lighting intensities related to transition through areas of varying brightness visual conditions change. Crews should be aware of the effects on flight deck visibility related to use of different flap settings, and approach speeds. Minimum usable TCH and minimum or maximum final approach descent gradients should be addressed, if applicable.
(9) Lighting. Proper use of various landing, taxi, turnoff, wing, logo, or strobe lights for approach visibility, taxi, or collision avoidance conspicuity.
(10) Rain Removal and De-fog. Proper procedures for use of rain removal/defog (e.g., windshield wipers). If windshield defog, anti-ice, or de-icing systems affect forward visibility, crews should be aware of those effects and be familiar with proper settings for use of that equipment related to low visibility landing.