Our local media The Australian has filed the following report:THE AUSTRALIAN P31 LANDING A WORLD FIRSTQantas

Our local media The Australian has filed the following report:THE AUSTRALIAN P31 LANDING A WORLD FIRSTQantas

Does that mean we don't need ILS any more?

No. ILS still provides the absolutely lowest weather minimums for properly equipped aircraft (Cat.IIIb). If you want to find out more info on the subject search the web for LAAS.

No. ILS still provides the absolutely lowest weather minimums for properly equipped aircraft (Cat.IIIb). If you want to find out more info on the subject search the web for LAAS.

CAT IIIc is the ILS approach with the lowest minimums.

CAT IIIc is the ILS approach with the lowest minimums.

Technically yes except that there is no airport in the world and no aircraft allowed to make use of IIIc.

Except those that are allowed by the administrator to perform those approachs. Most of them have synthetic HUD displays.

Except those that are allowed by the administrator to perform those approachs. Most of them have synthetic HUD displays.

Except that no one is allowed. CAT IIIb is currently the lowest operational approval granted to any US operator. Last I checked, the lowest operational approval in Europe is IIIb / 75 meters RVR. You will find facilities equipped with IIIc equipment such as low-visibility taxiway centerline liights, but no operational approval at IIIc is imminent. Limitations to be overcome include the problem of zero-vis taxi operations, and the feasibility of timely response by crash/fire/rescue personnel.

We must be talking about seperate regulatory rules then. Because I know Boeing has rights to test their equipment to 0/0 and so do some other avionics manufacturers.

We must be talking about seperate regulatory rules then. Because I know Boeing has rights to test their equipment to 0/0 and so do some other avionics manufacturers.

And you commercial pilot don't see the difference between "testing" and regular operations .. interesting :(By the way I even have my doubts if the above (about testing) is true. You can surely test this equipment much more efficiently without waiting infinitely long for weather at some airport to be particularly bad ...

And you commercial pilot don't see the difference between "testing" and regular operations .. interesting :(By the way I even have my doubts if the above (about testing) is true. You can surely test this equipment much more efficiently without waiting infinitely long for weather at some airport to be particularly bad ...

Wow quite a dig on my knowledge of aviation law. Let me educate you some.

Let me educate you some.

Instead of writing volumes like for an encyclopedia, most of that not even on the subject I was hoping that you provided a single concrete example of an "operator" who has specific blanket Cat. IIIc authorization and this example better not be something like "allowed to land IIIc when there is a total eclipse". So far I got absolutely nothing ...

Instead of writing volumes like for an encyclopedia, most of that not even on the subject I was hoping that you provided a single concrete example of an "operator" who has specific blanket Cat. IIIc authorization and this example better not be something like "allowed to land IIIc when there is a total eclipse". So far I got absolutely nothing ...

Well I'll have to ask some captains about it.This article looks familiar to the captain display that my dad or a test pilot was showing me that they are trying to put on the 747-8 for 0/0 operations. Although the Boeing one was a display that was to the left of the PFD and I didn't see any mention of a HUD.

Instead of autograph volumes like for an encyclopedia, a lot of of that not even on the accountable I was acquisitive that you provided a individual accurate archetype of an "operator" who has specific absolute Cat. IIIc approval and this archetype bigger not be something like "allowed to acreage IIIc if there is a absolute eclipse". So far I got actually annihilation ._________________How