Are there operators allowed to do CAT IIIc?

[DPApilot]

Like I said, taking it out of context. I guess the irony hit me a little different than everyone else. Anyways, no harm no foul.

But, fowl can cause harm.. Or maybe A320's harm the fowl?

 

[Cessna414JJB]

Beech/ Cessna....whats the difference anyways?
At least its real. And the "Cessna Sundowner" was a good plane too

 

[Stomp16]

But, fowl can cause harm.. Or maybe A320's harm the fowl?

Very true indeed!

 

[Cessnaflyer]

Haha I used to fly Cessna's back when I started my flight training in '99. I then taught at a school that had a great beech fleet. Now I love the Beech a hundred times more then the Cessna's. You can really feel the good landings students do!

 

[Roger, Roger]

I know of no US operators who's OpSpecs allow for a CATIIIc approach and landing. The landing is not the problem, it's the taxiing part that becomes the problem.

So who DOES use CATIIIC? Europe I guess?

 

[Cessnaflyer]

So who DOES use CATIIIC? Europe I guess?

That's what I was wondering too because why would they have a minimum that is never going to be implemented.

 

[907]

How well do CAT IIIc or any other CAT approaches work with crosswinds? Are there limitations wind wise for them?

 

[Cessnaflyer]

How well do CAT IIIc or any other CAT approaches work with crosswinds? Are there limitations wind wise for them?

I know there are wind restrictions for the autolands.

 

[A300Capt]

I know there are wind restrictions for the autolands.

Yes, there are wind restrictions usually in the range of 10-15kts. Generally speaking, winds are not a concern when vis is down in the 600RVR range. It's usually due to dense fog conditions.

 

[Barty]

That's what I was wondering too because why would they have a minimum that is never going to be implemented.

I'd assume so that if it were ever viable on a large scale, the IAP is available?