Zero-zero takeoff (also low visibility takeoff)

This zero zero business seems to come up a lot of ga forums.
The way I look at it is “do you really need a regulation to tell you that taking off when you can’t see anything in front or above you is a pretty stupid thing to do”
The fact that the FAA allow it but only in your own aircraft, should tell you something about what the regulators really think.
Airports and airlines and the safety regulators for CAT do indeed set limits or minimums. All of them are conscious of what an accidents due to LVOs can do to their business.
If pilots want to kill themselves doing stupid things, then as long as it doesn’t impact a 3rd party IMO they should be allowed to do so.😡

gallois wrote:

This zero zero business seems to come up a lot of ga forums.
The way I look at it is “do you really need a regulation to tell you that taking off when you can’t see anything in front or above you is a pretty stupid thing to do”

gallois, I think for many pilots want to know just to clarify the rules, more like a thought excercise?
Although for some MEP pilots it is a question of taking off from an airport where you could clearly see what you need and the transmissometers report some really low values.

We have always had the VIBAL which you can always ask for.
However, this may not work at airports with a commercial activity. At airports like Brest Bretagne LFRB for instance you might have a 400m take off minima. You cannot take off in less than that unless ATC declares LVTO procedures are in place. The pilot needs agreement from the competent authority to take off( this may have changed recently). But the main reason behind the need to declare LVTO’s in place is that everyone is then warned that operations will be limited to the need to eg clear the runway before the next aircraft can begin its approach.
At La Rochelle LFBH IIUC take off minima is now 500m it was 400m like everywhere else. IIRC this is something to do with lack of centre line markings or lights.
At Fontenay le Comte LFFK you are on your own. There used to be 400m or VIBAL (count the markers) but nowadays I believe NCO place no restrictions just warns you should avoid obstacles.

I did one under the hood once with my instrument instructor. It was a surprising non-event. If you do the math as long as you keep the heading within 1 degree, you’ll be fine in a small plane on a 50 foot wide runway. And in real life you can always see the centre-line – it’s not THAT zero (unless you’re in a 1950s London smog).

But to do it in real-life – totally insane. At Palo Alto, my home airport back in the US, three Tesla employees took off in a Cessna 310 in zero-zero conditions in 2010. The pilot promptly lost the plot. They crashed into a suburban street about a mile off the runway. They damaged quite a lot of property but miraculously nobody on the ground was hurt. The three in the plane were all killed. I remember driving to work that morning thinking, boy, what a terrible day this would be to try to fly.

Since I also learn with the same book, and also wondered:

In the early chapters, he also mentions that one can be in IMC at T/O. Around page 50.

And yes, our flight school recommended this book as very good preparation for practical IFR flying :-)

According to Part-NCO this is applicable:

NCO.OP.110 Aerodrome operating minima — aeroplanes and helicopters
(a) For instrument flight rules (IFR) flights, the pilot-in-command shall select and use aerodrome operating minima for each departure, destination and alternate aerodrome. Such minima shall:
(1) not be lower than those established by the State in which the aerodrome is located, except when specifically approved by that State; and
(2) when undertaking low visibility operations, be approved by the competent authority in accordance with Annex V (Part-SPA), Subpart E to Regulation (EU) No 965/2012.
(b) When selecting the aerodrome operating minima, the pilot-in-command shall take the following into account:
(1) the type, performance and handling characteristics of the aircraft;
(2) his/her competence and experience;
(3) the dimensions and characteristics of the runways and final approach and take-off areas (FATOs) that may be selected for use;
(4) the adequacy and performance of the available visual and non-visual ground aids;
(5) the equipment available on the aircraft for the purpose of navigation and/or control of the flight path, during the take-off, the approach, the flare, the landing, the rollout and the missed approach;
(6) the obstacles in the approach, the missed approach and the climb-out areas necessary for the execution of contingency procedures;
(7) the obstacle clearance altitude/height for the instrument approach procedures;
(8) the means to determine and report meteorological conditions; and
(9) the flight technique to be used during the final approach.
(c) The minima for a specific type of approach and landing procedure shall only be used if:
(1) the ground equipment required for the intended procedure is operative;
(2) the aircraft systems required for the type of approach are operative;
(3) the required aircraft performance criteria are met; and
(4) the pilot is qualified appropriately.

Then NCO.OP.111 and NCO.OP.112 define DH and MDH for different approach types. I really struggle to find where the above rules allow zero-zero takeoff.

Thanks Emir. And this (2) is where Part-NCO references Part-SPA, which in turn has been linked above.

I find it incredible that that book, which as we can see is used a lot by IR students, says that for non-commercial operations, RVRs of 0 are permissible.

It is true that a part 91 operator is not required by regulation to abide by any specified takeoff minimums, but other than a once or twice occurrence as a practice scenario during IFR training, this is not something that is probably extremely rare and not commonly done by pilots.

As far as any part 91 exemption for complying with other country flight regulations, I think that this would not be allowed based on this Part 91 regulation.

§ 91.703 Operations of civil aircraft of U.S. registry outside of the United States.
(a) Each person operating a civil aircraft of U.S. registry outside of the United States shall—
(1) When over the high seas, comply with Annex 2 (Rules of the Air) to the Convention on International Civil Aviation and with §§ 91.117(c), 91.127, 91.129, and 91.131;
(2) When within a foreign country, comply with the regulations relating to the flight and maneuver of aircraft there in force;