TurboJet landing mins

[chperplt]

Tubrojet landing minimums
Aside from Op specs and Cat 1,2,&3 training, turbojet landing minimums are 4000ft or 3/4 mile.

I assume this 4000-3/4 is listed in Part 25 but I don't know where.. Anyone know the specific reg?

Thanks

 

[AAsRedHeadedbro]

There are no separate turbojet landing minimums for approaches. For normal operations (for example - the captain is not "high mins") pilots of turbojets may use the lowest minimums commensurate with their final approach speed, typically Category B or C. A carrier or operator will have Ops Specs, of course, which may limit the minimums to some higher values (such as the requirement to add 100 and 1/2 to a captain with less than 100 hours in type).

 

[Gulfstream 200]

turbojet landing minimums???



I never saw seperate "Jepps for turbojets"

 

[regionalcap]

cheperplt is correct. The turbojet landing mimums are 3/4 mile unless you have gone through proper certification. On our proficiency checks, we have to do an approach to minimums which covers the training. Sorry I don't know the reg reference off the top of my head.

 

[chperplt]

regionalcap

Thanks

 

[AAsRedHeadedbro]

I will change my opinion if you can give me an official reference. Otherwise I stand by my statement.

I went to the FAA website and spent about an hour checking every possible reference I could and found nothing along those lines.

If you can show me, please do.

Thanks.

 

[chperplt]

Found it

This comes from the Air Transportation Operations Inspector's Handbook order 8400.10, Volume 4, Section 4, Part 541, subpart 2 (b)


B. Basic Turbojet Minimum. A basic turbojet VIS/RVR operating minimum has been established for all turbojet airplanes operated under parts 121 and 135. The basic turbojet minimum for straight-in nonprecision and precision approaches is ¾ statute mile visibility or RVR 4000. Any minimum less than the basic turbojet minimum is not authorized in turbojet aircraft until special requirements are met. When the airplane equipment, the runway lighting/marking systems, and the pilots are in compliance and qualified in accordance with AC 120-29 (as amended) and this hand_book, the lowest minimums that have been established for various approved approach and runway lighting/marking configurations may be authorized. The turbojet minimums for each of the approved approach and runway lighting/ marking configurations are specified in paragraphs C53 and C54 of the operations specifications.

 

[Timebuilder]

Well done, chperplt.

That Inspector's Handbook is a wealth of info.

 

[FlyingSig]

Re: Found it

B. Basic Turbojet Minimum. A basic turbojet VIS/RVR operating minimum has been established for all turbojet airplanes operated under parts 121 and 135. The basic turbojet minimum for straight-in nonprecision and precision approaches is ¾ statute mile visibility or RVR 4000.

I interpret this as a 121/135 deal and not a "tubojet" deal. If I want to land with a 1/2 mile (or whatever charted mins are below 3/4) in my own jet (Citation/whatever) flying under part 91, seems to me like all I have to do is be rated in the plane and have an instrument rating.

... comments?


btw, AC 120-29 that was referanced is titled : Criteria for Approving Category I and Category II Landing Minima for FAR 121 Operators

 

[Timebuilder]

If you are flying your own jet under part 91, then fine.

Most are not part 91 ops, which is a valid assumption for most inquiries here.

 

[FlyingSig]

Chperplt asked for a referance to Part 25 which is aircraft certification. I don't believe it is and that landing minima only applies to 121/135 and not the aircraft type itself. So unless I misunderstood his original question I would say that AA'sRedHead came up with the correct answer.

(in other words, if Chperplt picks up a new CRJ from the factory, that flight is done under part 91, he could shoot the appoach down to 1/2 mile even if his company didn't have training or ops specs for lower then 3/4.... and then on the very next leg in the very same aircraft be limited to that 3/4 because he now has passengers on board and the flight is being operated under part 121)

 

[chperplt]

I didn't say it was in part 25.. I assumed it was there, but we all know what happens when you assume something.

 

[AAsRedHeadedbro]

Wow!!

I stand corrected!

I had no idea.