A question has come up at my VA regarding autoland. Specifically, what are real world airline's SOP regarding autoland? Are there specific requirements on how many autolands must be performed, per year or month? In general, airline policy notwithstanding, do real world pilots use autoland very often?I'm posting here because I know many of you are real world commercial pilots and I would appreciate your input. Thanks guys.

i've got no idea as to rw sop's regarding autoland,but i do believe most pilots land the thing themselves,apart from being in a situation where an autoland might be mandatory,like zero visibility...and i sure am glad they land them.....i would screw up ;-)

Hi,Read this, and I'm sure you are a lot wiser :)http://www.smartcockpit.com/b767/CAT2_3%20OPS.PDFTero

I believe there is a currency requirement for both the a/c and the flight crew, to enable both to be legal for an auto-land. I'm not sure what it is though.Other than the currency requirements, I have heard that most pilots prefer to land the bird themselves.Bruce.

Well, I seem to recall it varies form airline to airline, when Eric Ernst used to post here on the old forum a few years ago he mentioned the rules for AA. I wonder if anyone could dig those up??

Thanks, guys for your input, I must apologize for not responding sooner but I've been moving and haven't had access to my computer.Tero, I read the briefing and will pass along the FAA minimum requirements for flight crews and aircraft to my VA.

I would just like to add a few comments to the autoland topic:In normal operations, no crew will use autoland exceptfor recurrent training. Why? There are a few reasons for this:a) If a crew were to use autoland often, they would slowly loose their hand-flying capabilities. In busy airspaces, the approach is basically one of the very few phases where the pilots actually hand fly the aircraft.:( An autoland is much more work intensive than any CAVOK approach. It requires much more concentration from both pilots than any other normal situation and crew coordination is very important. Not very easy after a 12 hour flight over the pond. Many people think an autoland is easier than handflying as you just press the APP button and engage the autopilot and spend the rest of the time making photos...An autoland requires constant monitoring. The pilot in command (he automatically becomes the pilot flying during any autoland) will only look outside and keep his hands on the controls. The first officer will constantly monitor the instruments, making sure the different modes become armed and engage at the right time (such as FLARE/ROLLOUT armed etc). If the autopilots fail to engage FLARE at 50 ft, you have to make a go around. Doesn't look too good when a perfectly stable aircraft suddenly aborts the landing at 50 ft above the ground... Not mentioning the amount of fuel that is thrown out just because the automation made a mistake...c) An autoland requires a much longer final than a handflown approach. At busy airspaces, the controllers will try to squeeze in as many aircraft as possible. Some then get a 5 mile final. In VMC conditions, you have to be established by 500ft AGL at the latest. If you are doing an autoland, you must be fully established and configured at 1000 ft AGL. You won't always make that limitation if you are on a short final.d) Swing overs and other visual approaches can not be made by the autopilot. In an autoland you'd have to abort the approach and fly a circuit. Again, not necessary.e) Not all runways are suitable for autolands. When "low visibility procedures" are not active, the aircraft on the ground will hold short of the runway much closer than during low vis procedures. This can cause some errors in the localizer signal. When flying visually, you'll just ignore a fluctuating localizer if you can clearly make out the runway. The autopilot can't.As you can see, an autoland does have its tricks and if flown properly (by the airlines, that is) it is by far easier and less work intensive than a handflown approach. Besides, its much more fun flying manually :-)Regards,MarkPS don't make me responsible for any numbers stated above, it is pretty late and I didn't want to look up the exact numbers (lazy me). It could be some of them belong to the 737-300/-500, but you get the idea ;-)