In my company, Wideroe/Norway we use the following procedure for CAT II
approache:
Passing OM
LP PNF: call: OM Altitude checked (compare to IAL)
RP FP: call: Checked (Compare to IAL)
1200 feet
LP PNF: call: Dual ILS (Check FGC dual)
RP FP: call: Checked (Check FGC dual)
At 600 feet RA
LP PNF: call: 600 feet RA (x-check RA)
RP PF : call: Stabilized (confirmed that the aircraft is stabilized; gear,
flaps, speed, condition lever max, power lever at normal app. power, normal
readings on flight instrument)
100 feet above DH
LP PNF: call: One hundred above (look for visual reference)
RP PF: call: Continue
30 feet above DH
RP PF: call: Decide
within 2 sec (latest at DH)
LP PNF: Call: Contact, my controls (This means that the commander has
contact and required visual references and will continue for landing)
RP FP: call: Your controls (Continue to monitor flight instrument)
50 feet above ground
RP PNF: call: 50 feet (and then call every 10 feet)
LP PF: call: AP disengaged
Landing
At minima (DH) without visual reference:
LP PNF: call: Minimums missed approach (monitor mis. app. and set nav aids
for miss. app.)
RP PF: call: Go around, set power 97, flap 15
I hope this prosedure can be to a value for you.
Best regards
Roy Rise
CRM instructor Wideroe
DHC-8 operator
----------
> Fra: Jeffrey Cuoio <cuoiojeffrey_at_hotmail.com>
> Til: crm-devel_at_db.erau.edu
> Kopi: cuoiojeffrey_at_hotmail.com
> Emne: Advice
> Dato: 8. desember 1998 15:50
>
>
> Greetings to all the CRMers,
> I've been reading these messages for a few months now and have not
> seen a question like mine, so please let me know if this is the wrong
> forum for this, but: I'm flying c-21's (US Air Force's version of a
> Learjet 35) here in Stuttgart, Germany. With the bad weather and
> two-man crew things can get quite busy. Thus, deviding up duties is
> essential. The division of duties that concerns me here is that our SOP
> for callouts on a low vis approach is that they are made by the pilot
> not flying (PNF). This caused a significant problem recently as we had
> a very experienced pilot (IP) flying with a very new copilot. At
> decision height the copilot was unable to acquire visual cues for
> continued approach and called go around as per SOP. The experience
> pilot started to push up the power for a go-around and immediately
> acquired the runway. The pilot checked the glideslope indicator and was
> still in a safe position to land (less than one dot high) and told the
> PNF that he was "visual, full-stop". The landing was uneventful, but it
> was obvious the copilot (PNF) was shaken by the experience. The IP and
> the copilot debriefed and then the IP came to me to relate the story.
> My question to you all is this: how do we convince the copilot that
> his input is very important and at the same time make a consession that
> the IP's experience put him in a situation to better recognize the
> lighting and evaluate a safe position to land? Asking the IP's around
> here, the majority (actually all that were asked) said they would have
> been comfortable continuing because the aircraft was still in a safe
> position for landing and because a go-around at Sarajevo airport can be
> quite tricky. My main concern is the copilot's belief in CRM and his
> position in it. I appreciate your time and inputs.
>
> Jeff Cuoio
> cuoiojeffrey_at_hotmail.com
>
> P.S. I would also like have a contact or two with any major US civilian
> carrier for questions outside this forum. Thanks.
>
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com