That's not likely not true, but the blind landings require certain=20 equipment, plane and crew certifications. There have been significant=20 changes in the last few years. Zero visibility landings are more=20 interesting once on the ground, with navigating around on the runway and=20 taxiways when you can't see anything. It was not unusual to send a=20 vehicle to drive out and leas the plane in. Then the hazard is taxiing=20 on to an active runway, or collision with other objects on the ground.=20 It's hard enough to keep those wingtips damage free. An interesting item is private operators, not for hire can depart (with=20 normal IFR clearances) in zero visibility. This could be a company owned=20 plane with only company employees on board. But generally the ability to=20 return to the same airport safely governs the go/no-go decision. On 2/22/2012 1:01 AM, Sean Breheny wrote: > In the US at least, to my knowledge, it is not allowed to land with > zero visibility unless there is an emergency. Each approach path to > each runway has a "decision height". While you are on approach in > instrument meteorological conditions, you can fly the approach > completely "blind" up until decision height. At that point, however, > if you cannot see the runway by eye or at least see the runway lights > by eye, you must abort the landing and fly to your designated > alternate landing site (or some other landing site or a different > runway at the same airport or sit in a holding pattern until the > weather improves). > > Of course, the above does not determine whether you use Auto-land or > do it manually but it does indicate that you should not normally be > landing in ultra-low visibility anyway. > > Sean > > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Tamas Rudnai w= rote: > =20 >> Interesting, I thought it was the opposite: Once it was really foggy and >> the pilot announced that now we will use auto pilot for landing as the >> visibility is zero... Everyone become very quiet all in a sudden and som= e >> was praying for the creator of zeros and ones :-) >> >> Tamas >> >> >> On 20 February 2012 15:21, Chris Roper wrote: >> >> =20 >>> On one flight I was on the Pilot came on the intercom after the landin= g >>> and said: >>> "sorry for the bumpy landing, regulations state we have to do >>> it manually occasionally to stay in practice" >>> >>> So I guess most landings are under Auto Pilot control too. >>> >>> On 20 February 2012 17:03, Bob Ammerman wrote: >>> >>> =20 >>>>> when was >>>>> the last time you flew on a robot-controlled airliner? I guess I am >>>>> just getting old... >>>>> >>>>> --Bob A >>>>> =20 >>>> The last time I flew, at least for a good part of the flight, I am sur= e. >>>> >>>> -- Bob Ammerman >>>> RAm Systems >>>> >>>> -- >>>> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ& list archive >>>> View/change your membership options at >>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist >>>> >>>> =20 >>> -- >>> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ& list archive >>> View/change your membership options at >>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist >>> >>> =20 >> >> >> -- >> int main() { char *a,*s,*q; printf(s=3D"int main() { char *a,*s,*q; >> printf(s=3D%s%s%s, q=3D%s%s%s%s,s,q,q,a=3D%s%s%s%s,q,q,q,a,a,q); }", >> q=3D"\"",s,q,q,a=3D"\\",q,q,q,a,a,q); } >> -- >> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ& list archive >> View/change your membership options at >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist >> =20 > =20 --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .