Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Welcome to our forums

Zero-zero takeoff (also low visibility takeoff)

This is legal in the USA and used to be legal in an N-reg, Part 91, in Europe, until some 5-10 years ago.

I have done it once under the hood with an instructor (a crazy but very competent FI who had a fake ATPL) and to my surprise holding the heading to a degree or two is enough to keep you on the runway for the required 500m or so.

However even in fog one can see the centreline – IF there is one.

There doesn’t appear to be a safety issue in the USA so I wonder why Europe banned it?

Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

It would scare the shit out of me. But that’s probably a question of getting used to it, like most things.

Safe landings !
EDLN, Germany

I don’t think it is particularly safe. It is just that very few people do it, and if it goes wrong is is not likely fatal, so it appears to be safe enough to not unduly endanger innocent bystanders.

Europe is still slowly reversing from the trickle down of regs from commercial ops into private ops, I think.

Biggin Hill

I think there is no move underway from the 400 metre RVR minimum in Europe.

Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

Just because there is no rule prohibiting it in the US doesn’t make it safe.

EGTK Oxford

I remember that almost every US airport I have looked at had some plate called “takeoff minima”. Are those non binding for Part 91, or how does that work? I mean this document:

Last Edited by Rwy20 at 13 Jun 21:51

Why would you do it in a single?

OK I know the risk of engine failure is tiny, but there are other issues that could arise requiring an immediate return or at least a quick return perhaps with everything else close at hand fogged in.

So its not the old single multi debate its more about placing yourself in a situation where you have absolutely no get out of jail card other than luck.

At least in a twin those risks are greatly diminished.

I have seen it done in the CIs if I recall, the fog came down rapidly, through 1,500 feet and glorious blue sky, but there was no where to go had the urgent need arisen.

I think it is taking luck even though on hugely good odds just a step beyong flying at night or over dense fog in a single. Hey, for an instrument pilot on his game 999 times out of 1,000 its going to work out just fine. In my flying i can think of maybe half a dozen times an immediate return was warranted, none involving the engine thank goodness, and of those I could have got to the next nearest airport if needs absolutely must.

As to practising, I would place the benefits somewhere less than spin training and switching off the engine completely down wind, so I cant see any value in the excercise.

But i am guessing this isnt just about singles, but both. I am also guessing its about holding runway heading on instruments, and dealing with an aborted, single or multi. In either or both the risks must be similiar, and, as you have said, not impossible holding heading on either, and even less hard in something that doesnt go that quick and with some forward viz and a centreline. Just pray that door doesnt pop and spoil your concentration.

Last Edited by Fuji_Abound at 13 Jun 22:18

I must have watched this video a dozen times. Trees flashing by the wing tips in the fog. Brave….

Buying, Selling, Flying
EISG, Ireland

boscomantico wrote:

I think there is no move underway from the 400 metre RVR minimum in Europe.

Yes there is.

EGKB Biggin Hill

If by Brave you mean stupid then yes. That isn’t an IFR departure. It is a visual departure in IMC.

EGTK Oxford
211 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top