Takeoff Mins/Pinnacle Ops Specs

[Smarta$$]

You are correct. Hopefully this ends this thread. If there is any doubt about this topic......look no further, jehtplane is right.

Actually Seven, You are completly incorrect. Try again.

 

[Smarta$$]

A whole lot of people thowing stones that don't know their head from their A$$.

 

[Ratherbsurfing]

Dude you're so wrong it's not even funny. Hope I don't have to ride on the back of your airplane. your understanding is dead wrong. You can only reduce if the chart allows those minimums. Your statement about the back of the chart being just for part 91 is flat out scary!

I'm just playing around and having fun. Anyone who does a little research will find that the takeoff minimums section of the 10-9 will, most of the time, correspond with the minimums allowed in one's op specs. Therefore, the op specs are controlling since jepp simply reflects them in their charts more or less.

And I thought my statement was pretty funny with respect to all the flight instructor types out there who should be getting laid on a weekend night and not digging through their ops manuals.

What this thread really should be about is what kind of jerk would come on a public forum like this and call out some of his peers for doing something they may not know about but could get them violated. Nobody I ever want to fly with. . .

 

[JustaNumber]

Admittedly, this is a confusing topic. Some of you have gotten close to explaining it, but I suspect that many are still scratching their heads. Would you believe that most of the posts here are correct, even the seemingly contradictory ones? Allow me to take a stab at clearing it up.

The main controversy seems to revolve around the question, "if the Jepps publish a takeoff visibility number, can I take off with less than that or not?" What's causing all this confusion, though, is the fact that there is not one, but usually two or more Jepp published numbers (or more accurately, sets of numbers).

The first set of numbers are under a column labeled "Standard". This is the most basic minima that must be met by any 121 or 135 operator. It is usually 5000 RVR/1 SM. If so, the runway has what are referred to as "standard takeoff mins".

If the runway has "standard mins", think of it as a box being checked off. If that box is checked off, then some operators that have jumped through extra hoops with the FAA get to use less restrictive minimums than those in the "Standard" column. (Thus half the posts here are correct).

So let's say the runway is categorized as having "standard mins"; that box is checked off. Now let's say you fly for an operator that has FAA approval for less than standard mins. You now refer to your ops specs for the exact conditions that must be met to go lower, and how much lower you can go. If those conditions are met, then you refer to the other columns in the Jepps, labeled "Adequate Vis Refs", and possibly also an additional column labeled by a specific set of other conditions. Some operators have custom Jepps that match up these numbers to their own ops specs, but regardless, you may not depart below these numbers ever. So the other half of the posters here are also correct.

Now, I have no idea how Pinnacle's cheap-ass LIDO charts are labeled, which could have added to the confusion. But I am quite certain that the crews in question did not meet their ops specs requirements, and departed illegally. And contrary to the previous poster who admonished the original poster as a tattletale, I commend the original post since it raised awareness of a potentially confusing issue, and hopefully will keep some future crews out of trouble.

 

[JustaNumber]

What this thread really should be about is what kind of jerk would come on a public forum like this and call out some of his peers for doing something they may not know about but could get them violated. Nobody I ever want to fly with. . .

What this thread really should be about is what kind of jerk would come on a public forum like this and complain about pilots trying to educate themselves to the best of their ability. Especially with all the recent incidents and accidents going on. Nobody I ever want to fly with. . .

 

[J32driver]

I used the "Disaster" that is LIDO for a bit at my airline. I vaguely remember that takeoff minimums were not contained with the airport charts. I thought we had to go to a separate section at the front (almost like notams) in order to find the takeoff mins that applied to an airport.

No matter what though, the lack of understanding by the majority of Pinnacle guys in this thread is absolutely astounding. It might be the fault of your training department, but I hope your POI finds out about this thread and starts asking some real hard questions of your checkairmen. If the 9E checkairmen are teaching things like you guys say.... I would NOT want to be anywhere near the training house when the POI shows up.

 

[ejpogo]

AVBUG

Thank you! Your post was spot-on. I was getting sick to my stoamch reading this thread until I read your post. I do not know if you put this down, but if there is a ceiling requirement put into the jepps, then you are not able to reduce.

Eric Pogo

 

[Ratherbsurfing]

And contrary to the previous poster who admonished the original poster as a tattletale, I commend the original post since it raised awareness of a potentially confusing issue, and hopefully will keep some future crews out of trouble.[/quote]

I commend anyone who comes on here to raise awareness and learn as well. It's refreshing in fact and the only reason I bother checking this website any longer really. However, I'm a little suspect of a person's motives when instead of being vague about an incident like this they instead point out particular airlines at particular airports at particular times on particular days.

 

[JustaNumber]

I commend anyone who comes on here to raise awareness and learn as well. It's refreshing in fact and the only reason I bother checking this website any longer really. However, I'm a little suspect of a person's motives when instead of being vague about an incident like this they instead point out particular airlines at particular airports at particular times on particular days.

I think he felt he needed to post the details so we could all look at the exact airport, the exact charts, the exact weather, the specific airlines involved's ops specs, etc. The tone of his posts is much more intellectual than vindictive, so I don't think he had any kind of sinister motives. I'll agree, perhaps he could have waited a few days and left the date out, so as to protect the guilty. Regardless, I'm glad he posted. And I hope the guilty have read this thread.

 

[titans10]

Non 121 crews and equipment.

think again