>You miss understood that statement. It doesn't say that, "B-747 is not >the ONLY aircraft authorized to autoland". It states that the 747 is >the only aircraft that MUST have autoland capability, (a working >autopilot with autoland ability), to fly a CAT II approach. I take that >to mean that other aircraft don't have to have autoland ability, and >therefore don't need the autopilot as you have stated.Correct. That is why I clarified my statement with the first Mike. However, ALL aircraft that are CAT II certified still have to meet dual FDs w/couplers in order to fly a CAT II.>If you don't believe the FAA documents, hey, more power to>you.Perhaps if you read the whole document, specifically the "Fail-Operational" and "Fail-Passive", you'd understand what I'm saying. After going back and re-reading what I wrote, it doesn't make sense.Somewhere in here is a clear thought. I really think we're all saying the same thing, but have specific aircraft in mind that are causing the confusion with each other.

Agreed, but most modern airliners have two pilots on board for a reason. Managing the workload with one person (as it is in FS/VATSIM) is next to impossible without the help of the A/P.

>In your Dassault Falcon, when the pilot is on a CAT III and>reaches the AH of 50 ft and doesn't see the runway, what must>he do? I'm pretty sure he has to go around. He has. So what??????? Maybe you have no clue what approach actually means. Maybe we have to start with a basic course what it means to fly an approach of certain category.>Autoland is>a mode that is armed without the pilots choice when two A/P>are monitoring the ILS signal. It is you who are NOT listening. Can we forget about Boing jets? It seems to pollute your ability to reason. I am tallking a jet with a single AP shooting ILS CAT II or CAT III. He is doing fine with regulatory approval, no autoland.Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_beta_member.jpg

>Correct. That is why I clarified my statement with the first>Mike. However, ALL aircraft that are CAT II certified still>have to meet dual FDs w/couplers in order to fly a CAT II.If you keep clarifying maybe we will finally get somewhere. This statement of yours above is significant departure from your previous "autoland line".Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_beta_member.jpg

You finally started to quote documentation cited above. I call it progress. ;)Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_beta_member.jpg

>I am>tallking a jet with a single AP shooting ILS CAT II or CAT>III. He is doing fine with regulatory approval, no autoland.Mike,I do concede the CAT II arguement. For the record, B-747 is required to autoland under CAT II criteria, not ALL aircraft even if they are capable (i.e. B757/B767).However, after re-reading you provided document....again, CAT III does require autoland. Cited from your document:

Ted,I am glad we reached some understanding.As to the official requirements for CAT III, remember that despite all the crap that FAA gets (being stuborn, slow, beaurocratic, etc.) it can be fairly flexible. It can issue you what is I think called STC (Supplemental Type Certificate) if they think you demonstrated to them that you meet certain criteria even though you may not meet other regulator requirements. It applies to engines, avionics, procedures, etc. So it is very likely that Dassault got such STC from the FAA based on the specialized equipment (the HUD) that they are allowed to shoot CAT III even though otherwise they don't meet the 'official' list. As a matter of fact if you go to Rockwell Collins page and find out about this particular product they tell you it makes you CAT III capable. Please not that this device doesn't allow you to make 0-0 landings, for such autoland is probably still required today.Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_beta_member.jpg

The autoland in CATII is NOT compulsory, it's at airline discretion. Some airline will put different landing minima for autocoupled approach followed by manual landing or full autoland in actual CATII conditions: normally, CATII with manual landing would have a DH of around 150 ft and a minimum RVR of 400 m, while the autoland minima would be down to 100 ft and RVR down to 350 m (somewhere even 300 m).CATIII are always autoland, except in the case of certified HUD that can let you down for a manual CATIIIA (not B or C) landing.

I was lucky enough to spend all of my Command years and most of my First Officer years in THREE PILOT crewed aircraft. I enjoyed TWO crew while I was on the Super 111 but when things went slightly awry it was a bit like being a "One armed paper hanger". The sheer luxury of having a third pilot when an emergency occurs needs to be experienced to be believed...he just takes all the fuss out of the situation and it all becomes just like on the Simulator...The flying pilot can really concentrate on the flying while the other two read and action and crosscheck every drill.Sadly, the airlines could not afford the expense of this luxury and I guess those days are gone forever. I consider that I was very fortunate to do all that Airline flying with a three pilot crew.Of course I was a Fighter Pilot first and foremost and all my best memories are from those 12 years...Single seaters and NO autopilot...Fabulous! :D

>>True, providing the pilot can see the runway at the DH. I>didn't say that a pilot had to autoland if he could see the>runway prior to DH.......You did explicitly state that CAT III REQUIRES autoland (which means a completely automated landing).

That is correct. Aircraft, aircrew, and runway must all be individually certified for CAT III operations (a,b,and/or c) or they're not allowed to use those procedures.2003 (I think it was) for example several runways at Schiphol were temporarilly downgraded from CAT II to CAT I while the equipment was being upgraded for CAT III operations (which temporarilly reduced the accuracy of especially the glideslope signals).They had to be recertified and eventually gained CAT IIIb status.If I were to fly that runway in a C172 with standard equipment I'd still not be able to legally use it to anything more accurate than CAT I though even if I'm a pilot with a classification to fly CAT IIIb simply because my aircraft lacks the required equipment.

>Cat II does not require autoland for all aircraft types. Cat>II dates back to 1964 and nobody was doing autolands in 1964.>In the document below you can get more info, including the>list of airborne equipment needed for cat II.That is correct. I got certified for CAT II as part of my Caravan training. The major hassle is making sure the particular aircraft I'm flying is equipped and certified for CAT II. An autoland capability is not required.

>>>Cat II does not require autoland for all aircraft types. Cat>>II dates back to 1964 and nobody was doing autolands in>1964.>>In the document below you can get more info, including the>>list of airborne equipment needed for cat II.>>That is correct. I got certified for CAT II as part of my>Caravan training. The major hassle is making sure the>particular aircraft I'm flying is equipped and certified for>CAT II. An autoland capability is not required.However Tim, (after much discussion here in this thread), I understand it that the B747 HAS to autoland in CAT II conditions, presumably because of the height of the cockpit when crossing the threshold. It's significantly higher than any other aircraft and could potentially keep "your head in the clouds" when runway contact is required to manually land.

This can be solved with the Gates.To program I've been seeing, but it's more money to get then I want to spend. That and I don't know many people that would want to link up with me to be FO or Capt. Hehe.----------------------------------------------------------------John MorganReal World: KGEG, UND Aerospace Spokane Satillite, Private ASEL 141.2 hrs, 314 landings, 46 inst. apprs.Virtual: MSFS 2004"There is a feeling about an airport that no other piece of ground can have. No matter what the name of the country on whose land it lies, an airport is a place you can see and touch that leads to a reality that can only be thought and felt." - The Bridge Across Forever: A Love Story by Richard Bach

-I highly doubt you'd be able to purchase an autopilot for a 172 that allows the use of more than the first notch flaps let alone any weather minima...rofl. I might be wrong though.