Basic Search

 
Display / Hide Categories
Results 1-5 of 832
Didn't find what you're looking for?
Search all Government of Canada websites

  1. Toronto/Lester B. Pearson International Airport Zoning Regulations - SOR/99-123 (SCHEDULE)

    [...]

    [...]

    PART IIDescription of the Approach Surfaces

    The approach surfaces, shown on Toronto/Lester B. Pearson International Airport Zoning Plan No. 21-005 94-138, Sheets 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 and 56, dated July 31, 1995, are surfaces abutting each end of the strips associated with the runways designated 06R-24L, 06L-24R, 15L-33R, 15R-33L, 05L-23R and 05R, and are described as follows:

    • (a) an inclined plane abutting the end of the strip associated with the approach to runway 06R having a ratio of 1 m measured vertically to 50 m measured horizontally, rising to an imaginary horizontal line drawn at right angles to the projected centre line of the strip and distant 15 000 m measured horizontally from the end of the strip; the outer ends of the imaginary horizontal line being 2 400 m from the projected centre line; said imaginary horizontal line being 300 m above the elevation at the end of the strip;

    • (b) an inclined plane abutting the end of the strip associated with the approach to runway 24L having a ratio of 1 m measured vertically to 50 m measured horizontally, rising to an imaginary horizontal line drawn at right angles to the projected centre line of the strip and distant 15 000 m measured horizontally from the end of the strip; the outer ends of the imaginary horizontal line being 2 400 m from the projected centre line; said imaginary horizontal line being 300 m above the elevation at the end of the strip;

    • (c) an inclined plane abutting the end of the strip associated with the approach to runway 06L having a ratio of 1 m measured vertically to 50 m measured horizontally, rising to an imaginary horizontal line drawn at right angles to the projected centre line of the strip and distant 15 000 m measured horizontally from the end of the strip; the outer ends of the imaginary horizontal line being 2 400 m from the projected centre line; said imaginary horizontal line being 300 m above the elevation at the end of the strip;

    • (d) an inclined plane abutting the end of the strip associated with the approach to runway 24R having a ratio of 1 m measured vertically to 50 m measured horizontally, rising to an imaginary horizontal line drawn at right angles to the projected centre line of the strip and distant 15 000 m measured horizontally from the end of the strip; the outer ends of the imaginary horizontal line being 2 400 m from the projected centre line; said imaginary horizontal line being 300 m above the elevation at the end of the strip;

    • (e) an inclined plane abutting the end of the strip associated with the approach to runway 15L having a ratio of 1 m measured vertically to 50 m measured horizontally, rising to an imaginary horizontal line drawn at right angles to the projected centre line of the strip and distant 15 000 m measured horizontally from the end of the strip; the outer ends of the imaginary horizontal line being 2 400 m from the projected centre line; said imaginary horizontal line being 300 m above the elevation at the end of the strip;

    • (f) an inclined plane abutting the end of the strip associated with the approach to runway 33R having a ratio of 1 m measured vertically to 50 m measured horizontally, rising to an imaginary horizontal line drawn at right angles to the projected centre line of the strip and distant 15 000 m measured horizontally from the end of the strip; the outer ends of the imaginary horizontal line being 2 400 m from the projected centre line; said imaginary horizontal line being 300 m above the elevation at the end of the strip;

    • (g) an inclined plane abutting the end of the strip associated with the approach to runway 15R having a ratio of 1 m measured vertically to 50 m measured horizontally, rising to an imaginary horizontal line drawn at right angles to the projected centre line of the strip and distant 15 000 m measured horizontally from the end of the strip; the outer ends of the imaginary horizontal line being 2 400 m from the projected centre line; said imaginary horizontal line being 300 m above the elevation at the end of the strip;

    • (h) an inclined plane abutting the end of the strip associated with the approach to runway 33L having a ratio of 1 m measured vertically to 50 m measured horizontally, rising to an imaginary horizontal line drawn at right angles to the projected centre line of the strip and distant 15 000 m measured horizontally from the end of the strip; the outer ends of the imaginary horizontal line being 2 400 m from the projected centre line; said imaginary horizontal line being 300 m above the elevation at the end of the strip;

    • (i) an inclined plane abutting the end of the strip associated with the approach to runway 05L having a ratio of 1 m measured vertically to 50 m measured horizontally, rising to an imaginary horizontal line drawn at right angles to the projected centre line of the strip and distant 15 000 m measured horizontally from the end of the strip; the outer ends of the imaginary horizontal line being 2 400 m from the projected centre line; said imaginary horizontal line being 300 m above the elevation at the end of the strip;

    • (j) an inclined plane abutting the end of the strip associated with the approach to runway 23R having a ratio of 1 m measured vertically to 50 m measured horizontally, rising to an imaginary horizontal line drawn at right angles to the projected centre line of the strip and distant 15 000 m measured horizontally from the end of the strip; the outer ends of the imaginary horizontal line being 2 400 m from the projected centre line; said imaginary horizontal line being 300 m above the elevation at the end of the strip; and

    • (k) an inclined plane abutting the end of the strip associated with the approach to runway 05R having a ratio of 1 m measured vertically to 50 m measured horizontally, rising to an imaginary horizontal line drawn at right angles to the projected centre line of the strip and distant 15 000 m measured horizontally from the end of the strip; the outer ends of the imaginary horizontal line being 2 400 m from the projected centre line; said imaginary horizontal line being 300 m above the elevation at the end of the strip.

    [...]

    The transitional surfaces, shown on Toronto/Lester B. Pearson International Zoning plan No. 21-005 94-138, Sheets 13, 14, 20, 21, 22, 23, 30, 31, 32, 33, 40, 41, 42 and 43, dated July 31, 1995, are inclined planes rising at a ratio of 1 m measured vertically to 7 m measured horizontally at right angles to the centre line and projected centre line of each strip, extending upward and outward from the lateral limits of each strip and its approach surfaces to an intersection with the outer surface or with another transitional surface.

    [...]

    The outer boundary of the land to which these Regulations apply, shown on Toronto/Lester B. Pearson International Airport Zoning Plan No. 21-005 94-138, Sheets 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 24, 25, 26, 27, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 and 56, dated July 31, 1995, is described as follows:

    [...]

    thence southerly along the eastern limit of the road allowance to its intersection with the northwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 23R;

    thence northeasterly along the northwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 23R on an azimuth of 37 degrees, 02 minutes, 20 seconds, to the northern corner of the approach surface for runway 23R, the UTM coordinates of which are E 619 064.68 and N 4 850 847.47;

    thence southeasterly along the northeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 23R on an azimuth of 135 degrees, 34 minutes, 11 seconds, to the intersection with the northwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 24R;

    thence northeasterly along the northwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 24R on an azimuth of 37 degrees, 02 minutes, 40 seconds, to the northern corner of the approach surface for runway 24R, the UTM coordinates of which are E 622 120.43 and N 4 849 204.28;

    thence southeasterly along the northeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 24R on an azimuth of 135 degrees, 34 minutes, 31 seconds, to the southeastern corner of the approach surface for runway 24R, the UTM coordinates of which are E 625 479.36 and N 4 845 777.21;

    thence southwesterly along the southeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 24R on an azimuth of 234 degrees, 06 minutes, 22seconds, to its intersection with the northeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 24L;

    thence southeasterly along the northeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 24L on an azimuth of 135 degrees, 34 minutes, 31 seconds, to the southeastern corner of the approach surface for runway 24L, the UTM coordinates of which are E 625 497.16 and N 4 845 367.72;

    thence southwesterly along the southeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 24L on an azimuth of 234 degrees, 06 minutes, 22 seconds, to its intersection with the western limit of the road allowance between Concession “A” Fronting the Humber and Concession “B” Fronting the Humber (now within Islington Avenue);

    [...]

    thence southerly along the western limit of the road allowance between Lots 20 and 21, in Concession 1 Northern Division Fronting the Lake (now within King’s Highway 427), to its intersection with the northeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 33R;

    thence southeasterly along the northeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 33R on an azimuth of 127 degrees, 03 minutes, 27 seconds, to the eastern corner of the approach surface for runway 33R, the UTM coordinates of which are E 623 928.08 and N 4 826 944.48;

    thence southwesterly along the southeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 33R on an azimuth of 225 degrees, 35 minutes, 18 seconds, to the southern corner of the approach surface for runway 33R, the UTM coordinates of which are E 620 500.26 and N 4 823 586.32;

    thence northwesterly along the southwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 33R on an azimuth of 324 degrees, 07 minutes, 08 seconds, to its intersection with the southeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 33L;

    thence southwesterly along the southeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 33L on an azimuth of 225 degrees, 35 minutes, 18 seconds, to its southwestern corner, the UTM coordinates of which are E 619 334.74 and N 4 823 251.75;

    thence northwesterly along the southwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 33L on an azimuth of 324 degrees, 07 minutes, 08 seconds, to its intersection with the northern limit of Bloor Street, in the City of Mississauga, in the Regional Municipality of Peel, as shown on a plan registered in the Land Registry Office for the Registry Division of Peel (Number 43) as number 719;

    [...]

    thence northwesterly along the northeastern limit of the road allowance between Concessions 1 and 2 West of Hurontario Street (now within McLaughlin Road) to its intersection with the southeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 06R;

    thence southwesterly along the southeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 06R on an azimuth of 217 degrees, 02 minutes, 40 seconds, to the southern corner of the approach surface for runway 06R, the UTM coordinates of which are E 602 033.17 and N 4 822 370.25;

    thence northwesterly along the southwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 06R on an azimuth of 315 degrees, 34 minutes, 31 seconds, to the intersection with the southeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 05R;

    thence southwesterly along the southeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 05R on an azimuth of 217 degrees, 02 minutes, 20 seconds, to the southwestern corner of the approach surface for runway 05R, the UTM coordinates of which are E 598 860.62 and N 4 823 750.17;

    thence northwesterly along the southwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 05R on an azimuth of 315 degrees, 34 minutes, 11 seconds, to its northwestern corner, the UTM coordinates of which are E 595 501.35 and N 4 827 176.90;

    thence northeasterly along the northwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 05R on an azimuth of 54 degrees, 06 minutes, 02 seconds, to its intersection with the southwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 05L;

    thence northwesterly along the southwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 05L on an azimuth of 315 degrees, 34 minutes, 11 seconds, to the most western corner of the approach surface for runway 05L, the UTM coordinates of which are E 595 277.15 and N 4 827 528.31;

    thence northeasterly along the northwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 05L on an azimuth of 54 degrees, 06 minutes, 02 seconds, to its intersection with the northeastern limit of the road allowance between Concessions 1 and 2 West of Hurontario Street (now within McLaughlin Road);

    [...]

    thence northwesterly along the southeastern production of the northeastern limit of Central Park Drive, and northwesterly and northeasterly along the eastern limit of Central Park Drive, as shown on plan number 857, to the intersection with the southwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 15R;

    thence northwesterly along the southwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 15R at an azimuth of 307 degrees, 03 minutes, 27 seconds, to its northwestern corner, the UTM coordinates of which are E 596 324.39 and N 4 846 739.50;

    thence northeasterly along the northwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 15R at an azimuth of 45 degrees, 35 minutes, 18 seconds, to its intersection with the southwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 15L;

    thence northwesterly along the southeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 15L at an azimuth of 307 degrees, 03 minutes, 27 seconds, to its northwestern corner, the UTM coordinates of which are E 597 070.44 and N 4 847 502.25;

    thence northeasterly along the northwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 15L at an azimuth of 45 degrees, 35 minutes, 18 seconds, to its northeastern corner, the UTM coordinates of which are E 600 498.27 and N 4 850 860.40;

    thence southeasterly at an azimuth of 144 degrees, 07 minutes, 08 seconds, along the northeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 15L to its intersection with the southeastern limit of Lot 6, in Concession 7 Northern Division;

    [...]

    Commencing at the intersection of the northeastern limit of the road allowance between Concessions 1 and 2 West of Hurontario Street, now within McLaughlin Road, in the geographic Township of Toronto, now in the City of Mississauga, with the northwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 06L;

    thence southwesterly along the northwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 06L at an azimuth of 234 degrees, 06 minutes, 22 seconds, to the intersection with the southeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 05R;

    thence northeasterly along the southeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 05R at an azimuth of 37 degrees, 02 minutes, 20 seconds, to the intersection with the northeastern limit of the road allowance between Concessions 1 and 2 West of Hurontario Street, now within McLaughlin Road;

    [...]

    commencing at the intersection of the southwestern limit of the road allowance between Concession “A” Fronting the Humber and Concession “B” Fronting the Humber, now within Islington Avenue, in the geographic Township of Etobicoke, now in the City of Etobicoke in the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, with the southeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 23R;

    thence northeasterly along the southeastern limit of the approach surface for runway 23R at an azimuth of 54 degrees, 06 minutes, 02 seconds, to the intersection with the northwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 24R;

    thence southwesterly along the northwestern limit of the approach surface for runway 24R at an azimuth of 217 degrees, 02 minutes, 40 seconds, to the intersection with the southwestern limit of the road allowance between Concession “A” Fronting the Humber and Concession “B” Fronting the Humber, now within Islington Avenue;

    [...]


  2. Canadian Aviation Regulations - SOR/96-433 (Section 705.48)
    •  (1) For the purposes of subsections (2) to (4), the visibility with respect to an aeroplane is less than the minimum visibility required for a non-precision approach, an APV or a CAT I precision approach if, in respect of the advisory visibility specified in the Canada Air Pilot and set out in column I of an item in the table to this section,

      • (a) where the RVR is measured by RVR “A” and RVR “B”, the RVR measured by RVR “A” for the runway of intended approach is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted;

      • (b) where the RVR is measured by only one of RVR “A” and RVR “B”, the RVR for the runway of intended approach is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted;

      • (c) where no RVR for the runway of intended approach is available, the runway visibility is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted; or

      • (d) where the aerodrome is located south of the 60th parallel of north latitude and no RVR or runway visibility for the runway of intended approach is available, the ground visibility at the aerodrome where the runway is located is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted.

    • (2) No person shall continue a non-precision approach or an APV unless

      • [...]

      • (b) the aeroplane is equipped with

        • (i) if the flight crew does not use pilot-monitored-approach procedures, an autopilot capable of conducting a non-precision approach or an APV to 400 feet AGL or lower, or

        • (ii) a HUD capable of conducting a non-precision approach or an APV to 400 feet AGL or lower;

      • (c) the instrument approach procedure is conducted to straight-in minima; and

      • (d) a visibility report indicates that

        • [...]

        • (iii) the visibility is less than the minimum visibility set out in subsection (1) and, at the time the visibility report is received, the aeroplane has passed the FAF inbound or, where there is no FAF, the point where the final approach course is intercepted.

    • (3) No person shall continue an SCDA non-precision approach unless

      • [...]

      • (b) the aeroplane is equipped with

        • (i) if the flight crew does not use pilot-monitored-approach procedures, an autopilot capable of conducting a non-precision approach to 400 feet AGL or lower, or

        • (ii) a HUD capable of conducting a non-precision approach to 400 feet AGL or lower;

      • (c) the instrument approach procedure is conducted to straight-in minima with a final approach course that meets the requirements of section 725.48 of Standard 725 — Airline Operations — Aeroplanes of the Commercial Air Service Standards;

      • (d) the final approach segment is conducted using a stabilized descent with a planned constant descent angle specified in section 725.48 of Standard 725 — Airline Operations — Aeroplanes of the Commercial Air Service Standards; and

      • (e) a visibility report indicates that

        • [...]

        • (iii) the visibility is less than the minimum visibility set out in subsection (1) and, at the time the visibility report is received, the aeroplane has passed the FAF inbound or, where there is no FAF, the point where the final approach course is intercepted.

    • (4) No person shall continue a CAT I precision approach to a runway with centreline lighting or a CAT I precision approach in an aeroplane equipped with a HUD unless

      • [...]

      • (b) in the case of an aeroplane not equipped with a HUD,

        • (i) if the flight crew does not use pilot-monitored-approach procedures, the pilot-in-command and the second-in-command are qualified to conduct a CAT II precision approach,

        • (ii) the aeroplane is equipped with

          • (A) a flight director and autopilot capable of conducting a coupled precision approach to 200 feet AGL or lower, or

          • (B) if the flight crew uses pilot-monitored-approach procedures, a flight director capable of conducting a precision approach to 200 feet AGL or lower, and

        • (iii) the runway is equipped with serviceable high-intensity approach lighting, high-intensity runway centreline lighting and high-intensity runway edge lighting;

      • (c) in the case of an aeroplane equipped with a HUD capable of conducting a precision approach to 200 feet AGL or lower,

        • (i) the pilot-in-command and the second-in-command are qualified to conduct a CAT II precision approach,

        • (ii) the aeroplane is equipped with a flight director and autopilot capable of conducting a coupled precision approach to 200 feet AGL or lower, and

        • (iii) the runway is equipped with serviceable high-intensity approach lighting and high-intensity runway edge lighting; and

      • (d) a visibility report indicates that

        • [...]

        • (iii) the visibility is less than the minimum visibility set out in subsection (1) and, at the time the visibility report is received, the aeroplane has passed the FAF inbound or, where there is no FAF, the point where the final approach course is intercepted.

      TABLE

      Approach Bans — Visibility

    [...]


  3. Canadian Aviation Regulations - SOR/96-433 (Section 704.37)
    •  (1) For the purposes of subsections (2) to (4), the visibility with respect to an aeroplane is less than the minimum visibility required for a non-precision approach, an APV or a CAT I precision approach if, in respect of the advisory visibility specified in the Canada Air Pilot and set out in column I of an item in the table to this section,

      • (a) where the RVR is measured by RVR “A” and RVR “B”, the RVR measured by RVR “A” for the runway of intended approach is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted;

      • (b) where the RVR is measured by only one of RVR “A” and RVR “B”, the RVR for the runway of intended approach is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted;

      • (c) where no RVR for the runway of intended approach is available, the runway visibility is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted; or

      • (d) where the aerodrome is located south of the 60th parallel of north latitude and no RVR or runway visibility for the runway of intended approach is available, the ground visibility at the aerodrome where the runway is located is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted.

    • (2) No person shall continue a non-precision approach or an APV unless

      • [...]

      • (b) the aeroplane is equipped with

        • (i) if the flight crew does not use pilot-monitored-approach procedures, an autopilot capable of conducting a non-precision approach or an APV to 400 feet AGL or lower, or

        • (ii) a HUD capable of conducting a non-precision approach or an APV to 400 feet AGL or lower;

      • (c) the instrument approach procedure is conducted to straight-in minima; and

      • (d) a visibility report indicates that

        • [...]

        • (iii) the visibility is less than the minimum visibility set out in subsection (1) and, at the time the visibility report is received, the aeroplane has passed the FAF inbound or, where there is no FAF, the point where the final approach course is intercepted.

    • (3) No person shall continue an SCDA non-precision approach unless

      • [...]

      • (b) the aeroplane is equipped with

        • (i) if the flight crew does not use pilot-monitored-approach procedures, an autopilot capable of conducting a non-precision approach to 400 feet AGL or lower, or

        • (ii) a HUD capable of conducting a non-precision approach to 400 feet AGL or lower;

      • (c) the instrument approach procedure is conducted to straight-in minima with a final approach course that meets the requirements of section 724.37 of Standard 724 — Commuter Operations — Aeroplanes of the Commercial Air Service Standards;

      • (d) the final approach segment is conducted using a stabilized descent with a planned constant descent angle specified in section 724.37 of Standard 724 — Commuter Operations — Aeroplanes of the Commercial Air Service Standards; and

      • (e) a visibility report indicates that

        • [...]

        • (iii) the visibility is less than the minimum visibility set out in subsection (1) and, at the time the visibility report is received, the aeroplane has passed the FAF inbound or, where there is no FAF, the point where the final approach course is intercepted.

    • (4) No person shall continue a CAT I precision approach to a runway with centreline lighting or a CAT I precision approach in an aeroplane equipped with a HUD unless

      • [...]

      • (b) in the case of an aeroplane not equipped with a HUD,

        • (i) if the flight crew does not use pilot-monitored-approach procedures, the pilot-in-command and the second-in-command are qualified to conduct a CAT II precision approach,

        • (ii) the aeroplane is equipped with

          • (A) a flight director and autopilot capable of conducting a coupled precision approach to 200 feet AGL or lower, or

          • (B) if the flight crew uses pilot-monitored-approach procedures, a flight director capable of conducting a precision approach to 200 feet AGL or lower, and

        • (iii) the runway is equipped with serviceable high-intensity approach lighting, high-intensity runway centreline lighting and high-intensity runway edge lighting;

      • (c) in the case of an aeroplane equipped with a HUD capable of conducting a precision approach to 200 feet AGL or lower,

        • (i) the pilot-in-command and the second-in-command are qualified to conduct a CAT II precision approach,

        • (ii) the aeroplane is equipped with a flight director and autopilot capable of conducting a coupled precision approach to 200 feet AGL or lower, and

        • (iii) the runway is equipped with serviceable high-intensity approach lighting and high-intensity runway edge lighting; and

      • (d) a visibility report indicates that

        • [...]

        • (iii) the visibility is less than the minimum visibility set out in subsection (1) and, at the time the visibility report is received, the aeroplane has passed the FAF inbound or, where there is no FAF, the point where the final approach course is intercepted.

      TABLE

      Approach Bans — Visibility

    [...]


  4. Canadian Aviation Regulations - SOR/96-433 (Section 703.41)
    •  (1) For the purposes of subsections (2) to (4), the visibility with respect to an aeroplane is less than the minimum visibility required for a non-precision approach, an APV or a CAT I precision approach if, in respect of the advisory visibility specified in the Canada Air Pilot and set out in column I of an item in the table to this section,

      • (a) where the RVR is measured by RVR “A” and RVR “B”, the RVR measured by RVR “A” for the runway of intended approach is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted;

      • (b) where the RVR is measured by only one of RVR “A” and RVR “B”, the RVR for the runway of intended approach is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted;

      • (c) where no RVR for the runway of intended approach is available, the runway visibility is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted; or

      • (d) where the aerodrome is located south of the 60th parallel of north latitude and no RVR or runway visibility for the runway of intended approach is available, the ground visibility at the aerodrome where the runway is located is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted.

    • (2) No person shall continue a non-precision approach or an APV unless

      • [...]

      • (c) if the flight crew does not use pilot-monitored-approach procedures, the aeroplane is equipped with an autopilot capable of conducting a non-precision approach or an APV to 400 feet AGL or lower;

      • (d) the instrument approach procedure is conducted to straight-in minima; and

      • (e) a visibility report indicates that

        • [...]

        • (iii) the visibility is less than the minimum visibility set out in subsection (1) and, at the time the visibility report is received, the aeroplane has passed the FAF inbound or, where there is no FAF, the point where the final approach course is intercepted.

    • (3) No person shall continue an SCDA non-precision approach unless

      • [...]

      • (c) if the flight crew does not use pilot-monitored-approach procedures, the aeroplane is equipped with an autopilot capable of conducting a non-precision approach to 400 feet AGL or lower;

      • (d) the instrument approach procedure is conducted to straight-in minima with a final approach course that meets the requirements of section 723.41 of Standard 723 — Air Taxi — Aeroplanes of the Commercial Air Service Standards;

      • (e) the final approach segment is conducted using a stabilized descent with a planned constant descent angle specified in section 723.41 of Standard 723 — Air Taxi — Aeroplanes of the Commercial Air Service Standards; and

      • (f) a visibility report indicates that

        • [...]

        • (iii) the visibility is less than the minimum visibility set out in subsection (1) and, at the time the visibility report is received, the aeroplane has passed the FAF inbound or, where there is no FAF, the point where the final approach course is intercepted.

    • (4) No person shall continue a CAT I precision approach to a runway with centreline lighting unless

      • [...]

      • (c) the aeroplane is equipped with

        • (i) a flight director and autopilot capable of conducting a coupled precision approach to 200 feet AGL or lower, or

        • (ii) if the flight crew uses pilot-monitored-approach procedures, a flight director capable of conducting a precision approach to 200 feet AGL or lower;

      • (d) the runway is equipped with serviceable high-intensity approach lighting, high-intensity runway centreline lighting and high-intensity runway edge lighting; and

      • (e) a visibility report indicates that

        • [...]

        • (iii) the visibility is less than the minimum visibility set out in subsection (1) and, at the time the visibility report is received, the aeroplane has passed the FAF inbound or, where there is no FAF, the point where the final approach course is intercepted.

      TABLE

      Approach Bans — Visibility

    [...]


  5. Canadian Aviation Regulations - SOR/96-433 (Section 700.10)
    •  (1) For the purposes of subsection (3), the visibility with respect to an aeroplane is less than the minimum visibility required for a non-precision approach, an APV or a CAT I precision approach if, in respect of the advisory visibility specified in the Canada Air Pilot and set out in column I of an item in the table to this section,

      • (a) where the RVR is measured by RVR “A” and RVR “B”, the RVR measured by RVR “A” for the runway of intended approach is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted;

      • (b) where the RVR is measured by only one of RVR “A” and RVR “B”, the RVR for the runway of intended approach is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted;

      • (c) where no RVR for the runway of intended approach is available, the runway visibility is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted; or

      • (d) where the aerodrome is located south of the 60th parallel of north latitude and no RVR or runway visibility for the runway of intended approach is available, the ground visibility at the aerodrome where the runway is located is less than the visibility set out in column II of the item for the approach conducted.

    • (2) For the purposes of subsection (3), the visibility with respect to a helicopter is less than the minimum visibility required for a non-precision approach, an APV or a CAT I precision approach if

      • (a) where the RVR is measured by RVR “A” and RVR “B”, the RVR measured by RVR “A” for the surface of intended approach is less than 1,200 feet; or

      • (b) where the RVR is measured by only one of RVR “A” and RVR “B”, the RVR for the surface of intended approach is less than 1,200 feet.

    • (3) Where the visibility is less than the minimum visibility set out in subsection (1) or (2), as applicable, no person shall continue a non-precision approach, an APV or a CAT I precision approach in an IFR aircraft unless

      • (a) at the time a visibility report is received, the aircraft has passed the FAF inbound or, where there is no FAF, the point where the final approach course is intercepted;

      • (b) the aircraft is on a training flight where a landing is not intended and the appropriate air traffic control unit is informed that a missed approach procedure will be initiated at or above the decision height or minimum descent altitude, as appropriate;

      • [...]

      • (d) where the aerodrome is located south of the 60th parallel of north latitude and no RVR or runway visibility for the runway of intended approach is available, the ground visibility at the aerodrome where the runway is located is reported to vary between distances less than and greater than the minimum visibility;

      • (e) a localized meteorological phenomenon is affecting the ground visibility to the extent that the visibility on the approach to the runway of intended approach and along that runway, as observed by the pilot-in-command in flight and reported immediately to ATS, if available, is equal to or greater than the advisory visibility specified in the Canada Air Pilot in respect of the runway of intended approach for the instrument approach procedure conducted; or

      • (f) the approach is conducted in accordance with section 703.41, 704.37 or 705.48.

    • (4) No pilot-in-command of an IFR aircraft operated under this Part shall commence a non-precision approach, an APV or a CAT I precision approach to an airport where low-visibility procedures are in effect.

      TABLE

      Approach Bans — Visibility

    [...]



Type:

Titles:

Date modified: