4 ms·

Theoretically - can civil aviation pilots land in "dark room" conditions, when there is zero visibility from windows at all times? I know that they can approach

by Yizahi 7y ago

Theoretically - can civil aviation pilots land in "dark room" conditions, when there is zero visibility from windows at all times? I know that they can approach at least, but can they actually land in the "dark"?

t0mas88 7y ago
No, normally we need at least 550m RVR (runway visual range) for a Cat I instrument approach. You need to see the runway (or lights) to be allowed to descend below 200ft and land, if you don't see it at that point you abort the landing. The visibility can be lower with special procedures, extra training, and things like a HUD. But it will not go down to zero. To land in zero visibility you need "autoland" which requires an aircraft certified to do that (multiple autopilot computers etc), crew certified and current (having done it recently) and special procedures at the airport. In that case the autopilot will control the aircraft all the way to rollout.
- sails 7y ago
  If they couldn't get the bugs off the screen, what might they have done?
  - cjrp 7y ago
    Check the weather radar for the nearest rainstorm
  - t0mas88 7y ago
    Find a very long runway, fly an LPV or ILS approach. When the radar altimeter is around 20 or 30ft depending on the size of the plane, reduce power and keep the nose up. Fly it into the runway at a 100ft/min descend rate. This is roughly what we learned as a contingency in a small plane when you had a night landing without lights. You need the long runway because it takes some time to get down so you're going to waste some length trying to touch down gently.
    - sails 7y ago
      That sounds very tense. Hate to do that on a passenger plane where you aren't likely to find a runway longer than your destination anyway.
flak48 7y ago
On a CAT III Instrument Landing System equipped runway, of which there a very few globally, sure. Like in this video where the plane lands itself at Amsterdam : https://youtu.be/Q0BNpgphL7s https://youtu.be/Q0BNpgphL7s You can hear the autopilot disconnecting at 1:38, almost 25 seconds after touchdown.
emilfihlman 7y ago
Of course, that's what instrument rating requires. Is it hard? Yes, and more dangerous, but entirely doable. Most airplanes can also land automatically on most airports.
- t0mas88 7y ago
  All three of your claims are wrong. When flying on instruments you still land visually at the end. Instrument flying isn't more dangerous, actually all airline flights are instrument flights even in good weather. They're safer due to much higher margins compared to visual flying. Not a lot of airplanes can fully autoland, and they definitely cannot do it on "most airports", it requires special ground equipment and special procedures.
  - emilfihlman 7y ago
    You didn't address my claims, but changed them to your liking. >When flying on instruments you still land visually at the end. If you can, of course, if you can't, you'll land with instruments. >Instrument flying isn't more dangerous Instrument landing without visual is more dangerous >Not a lot of airplanes can fully autoland, and they definitely cannot do it on "most airports", it requires special ground equipment and special procedures. Almost all commercial operations and commercial airports can. Your tiny Cessna is not really important here and you don't need instrument rating to fly one.
michaelt 7y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_9 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/pilots-awarded-medal-for-landing-blind-after-istanbul-hailstorm/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/pilots-awarded-medal... It's not recommended, but if a plane is in the situation where the windscreen is opaque and the alternative is to circle until they run out of fuel then crash, landing blind is at least better than that.

by Yizahi 7y ago

t0mas88 7y ago

No, normally we need at least 550m RVR (runway visual range) for a Cat I instrument approach. You need to see the runway (or lights) to be allowed to descend below 200ft and land, if you don't see it at that point you abort the landing. The visibility can be lower with special procedures, extra training, and things like a HUD. But it will not go down to zero. To land in zero visibility you need "autoland" which requires an aircraft certified to do that (multiple autopilot computers etc), crew certified and current (having done it recently) and special procedures at the airport. In that case the autopilot will control the aircraft all the way to rollout.

sails 7y ago
If they couldn't get the bugs off the screen, what might they have done?
- cjrp 7y ago
  Check the weather radar for the nearest rainstorm
- t0mas88 7y ago
  Find a very long runway, fly an LPV or ILS approach. When the radar altimeter is around 20 or 30ft depending on the size of the plane, reduce power and keep the nose up. Fly it into the runway at a 100ft/min descend rate. This is roughly what we learned as a contingency in a small plane when you had a night landing without lights. You need the long runway because it takes some time to get down so you're going to waste some length trying to touch down gently.
  - sails 7y ago
    That sounds very tense. Hate to do that on a passenger plane where you aren't likely to find a runway longer than your destination anyway.

flak48 7y ago

On a CAT III Instrument Landing System equipped runway, of which there a very few globally, sure. Like in this video where the plane lands itself at Amsterdam : https://youtu.be/Q0BNpgphL7s https://youtu.be/Q0BNpgphL7s You can hear the autopilot disconnecting at 1:38, almost 25 seconds after touchdown.

emilfihlman 7y ago

Of course, that's what instrument rating requires. Is it hard? Yes, and more dangerous, but entirely doable. Most airplanes can also land automatically on most airports.

t0mas88 7y ago
All three of your claims are wrong. When flying on instruments you still land visually at the end. Instrument flying isn't more dangerous, actually all airline flights are instrument flights even in good weather. They're safer due to much higher margins compared to visual flying. Not a lot of airplanes can fully autoland, and they definitely cannot do it on "most airports", it requires special ground equipment and special procedures.
- emilfihlman 7y ago
  You didn't address my claims, but changed them to your liking. >When flying on instruments you still land visually at the end. If you can, of course, if you can't, you'll land with instruments. >Instrument flying isn't more dangerous Instrument landing without visual is more dangerous >Not a lot of airplanes can fully autoland, and they definitely cannot do it on "most airports", it requires special ground equipment and special procedures. Almost all commercial operations and commercial airports can. Your tiny Cessna is not really important here and you don't need instrument rating to fly one.

michaelt 7y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_9 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/pilots-awarded-medal-for-landing-blind-after-istanbul-hailstorm/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/pilots-awarded-medal... It's not recommended, but if a plane is in the situation where the windscreen is opaque and the alternative is to circle until they run out of fuel then crash, landing blind is at least better than that.