NCC.OP.225 Approach and landing conditions — aeroplanes and helicopters

LANDING DISTANCE ASSESSMENT

(a)The in-flight landing distance assessment should be based on the latest available weather report and runway condition report (RCR).

(b)The assessment should be initially carried out when the weather report and the RCR are obtained, usually around top of descent. If the planned duration of the flight does not allow to carry out the assessment in non-critical phases of flight, the assessment should be carried out before departure.

(c)When meteorological conditions may lead to a degradation of the runway surface condition, the assessment should include consideration of how much deterioration in runway surface friction characteristics may be tolerated, so that a quick decision can be made prior to landing.

(d)The flight crew should monitor the evolution of the actual conditions during the approach, to ensure that they do not degrade below the condition that was previously determined to be the minimum acceptable.

(e)The in-flight determination of the landing distance should be done is such way that either:

(1)the landing distance available (LDA) on the intended runway is at least 115 % of the landing distance at the estimated time of landing, determined in accordance with the performance information for the assessment of the landing distance at time of arrival (LDTA); or

(2)if performance information for the assessment of the LDTA is not available, the LDA on the intended runway at the estimated time of landing is at least the landing distance determined at the time of dispatch.

(f)If performance information for the assessment of the LDTA is available, it should be based on approved data contained in the AFM, or on other data that is either determined in accordance with the applicable certification standards for aeroplanes or determined by the Agency.

(g)Whenever the runway braking action encountered during the landing roll is not as good as reported by the aerodrome operator in the RCR, the pilot-in-command should notify the air traffic services (ATS) by means of a special air-report (AIREP) as soon as practicable.

LANDING DISTANCE The assessment of the LDTA begins with the acquisition of the latest available weather information and the RCR. The information provided in the RCR is divided in two sections:

(a)The ‘aircraft performance’ section which contains information that is directly relevant in a performance computation.

(b)The ‘situational awareness’ section which contains information that the flight crew should be aware of for a safe operation, but which does not have a direct impact on the performance assessment. The ‘aircraft performance’ section of the RCR includes a runway condition code (RWYCC), the contaminant type, depth and coverage for each third of the runway. The determination of the RWYCC is based on the use of the runway condition assessment matrix (RCAM); however, the presentation of the information in the RCAM is appropriate for use by aerodrome personnel trained and competent in assessing the runway condition in a way that is relevant to aircraft performance. While full implementation of the RCAM standard would eventually no longer require the flight crew to derive from various information available to them the appropriate runway condition to be used for the landing performance assessment at the time of arrival, it is desirable that pilots maintain an understanding of the performance effect of various components considered in the assessment. It is the task of the aerodrome personnel to assess the appropriate RWYCC in order to allow the flight crew to assess any potential change of the runway in use. When no RWYCC is available in winter conditions, the RCAM provides the flight crew with a combination of the relevant information (runway surface conditions: state and/or contaminant or pilot report of braking action (AIREP)) in order to determine the RWYCC. Table 1 below is an excerpt of the RCAM and permits to carry out the primary assessment based on the reported contaminant type and depth, as well as on the OAT. Table 1: Association between the runway surface condition and the RWYCC based on the reported contaminant type and depth and OAT

Note 1: Under certain conditions, frost may cause the surface to become very slippery. Note 2: Operations in conditions where less-than-poor braking action prevails are prohibited. Note 3: The runway surface temperature should preferably be used where available.

A primary assessment may have to be downgraded by the aerodrome operator based on an AIREP of lower braking action than the one typically associated with the type and depth of contaminant on the runway. Upgrading a RWYCC 5, 4, 3 or 2 determined by the aerodrome operator from the observed contaminant type is not allowed. A RWYCC 1 or 0 maybe be upgraded by the aerodrome operator to a maximum of RWYCC 3. The reason for the upgrade will be specified in the ‘situational awareness’ section of the RCR. When the aerodrome operator is approved for operations on specially prepared winter runways, in accordance with Annex V (Part-ADR.OPS) to Regulation (EU) No 139/2014, the RWYCC of a runway that is contaminated with compacted snow or ice, may be upgraded to RWYCC 4 depending upon a specific treatment of the runway. In such cases, the reason for the upgrade will be specified in the ‘situational awareness’ section of the RCR.

RCR, RWYCC and RCAM A detailed description of the RCR format and content, the RWYCC and the RCAM may be found in Annex V (Part-ADR.OPS) to Regulation (EU) No 139/2014. Further guidance may be found in the following documents:

(a)ICAO Doc 9981 ‘PANS Aerodromes’;

(b)ICAO Doc 4444 ‘PANS ATM’;

(c)ICAO Doc 10064 ‘Aeroplane Performance Manual’; and

(d)ICAO Circular 355 ‘Assessment, Measurement and Reporting of Runway Surface Conditions’.

PERFORMANCE INFORMATION FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF LDTA Guidance on performance information for the assessment of the LDTA may be found in:

(a)AMC1 CAT.OP.MPA.303(e) of the AMC & GM to Annex IV (Part CAT) to Regulation (EU) No 965/2012; and

(b)ICAO Doc 10064 ‘Aeroplane Performance Manual’.

REPORTING ON RUNWAY BRAKING ACTION The role of the flight crew in the runway surface condition reporting process does not end once a safe landing has been achieved. While the aerodrome operator is responsible for generating the RCR, flight crew are responsible for providing accurate braking action reports. The flight crew braking action reports provide feedback to the aerodrome operator regarding the accuracy of the RCR resulting from the observed runway surface conditions. ATC passes these braking action reports to the aerodrome operator, which in turn uses them in conjunction with the RCAM to determine if it is necessary to downgrade or upgrade the Runway Condition Code (RWYCC). During busy times, runway inspections and maintenance may be less frequent and need to be sequenced with arrivals. Therefore, aerodrome operators may depend on braking action reports to confirm that the runway surface condition is not deteriorating below the assigned RCR. Since both the ATC and the aerodrome operator rely on accurate braking action reports, flight crew should use standardised terminology in accordance with ICAO Doc 4444 ‘PANS ATM’. The following Table 1 shows the correlation between the terminology to be used in the AIREP to report the braking action and the RWYCC. Table 1: Association between AIREP and RWYCC

An AIREP should be transmitted to the ATC, in accordance with one of the following specifications, as applicable:

(a)Good braking action is reported as ‘BRAKING ACTION GOOD’.

(b)Good to medium braking action is reported as ‘BRAKING ACTION GOOD TO MEDIUM’.

(c)Medium braking action is reported as ‘BRAKING ACTION MEDIUM’.

(d)Medium to poor braking action is reported as “BRAKING ACTION MEDIUM TO POOR”

(e)Poor braking action is reported as ‘BRAKING ACTION POOR’.

(f)Less than poor braking action is reported as ‘BRAKING ACTION LESS THAN POOR’. In some cases, the differences between two consecutive levels of the six braking action categories between ‘Good’ and ‘Less than Poor’ may be too subtle for the flight crew to detect. It is therefore acceptable for the flight crew to report on a more coarse scale of ‘Good’, ‘Medium’ and ‘Poor’. Whenever requested by ATC, or if the braking action encountered during the landing roll is not as previously reported by the aerodrome operator in the RCR, pilots should provide a braking action report. This is especially important and safety relevant where the experienced braking action is worse than the braking action associated with any RWYCC code currently in effect for that portion of the runway concerned. When the experienced braking action is better than that reported by the aerodrome operator, it is important to report this information, which may trigger further actions for the aerodrome operator in order to upgrade the RCR. If an aircraft-generated braking action report is available, it should be transmitted, identifying its origin accordingly. If the flight crew have a reason to modify the aircraft-generated braking action report based on their judgement, the commander should be able to amend such report. A braking action AIREP of ‘Less Than Poor’ leads to a runway closure until the aerodrome operator can improve the runway condition. An air safety report should be submitted whenever flight safety has been endangered due to low braking action.

FLIGHT CREW TRAINING Flight crew should be trained on the use of the RCR, on the use of performance data for the assessment of the LDTA, if available, and on reporting braking action using the AIREP format. Guidance on the development of the content of the training may be found in:

(a)AMC1 CAT.OP.MPA.303 & CAT.OP.MPA.311 of the AMC & GM to Annex IV (Part CAT) to Regulation (EU) No 965/2012, as applicable to the intended operations;

(b)ICAO Doc 10064 ‘Aeroplane Performance Manual’; and

(c)ICAO Circular 355 ‘Assessment, Measurement and Reporting of Runway Surface Conditions’.