Narrative:

Possible landing below minimums at night. Pvd airport and runway 5R visible from 20 mi out. Patchy ground fog, approximately 10% coverage and cavu otherwise. ATIS reported RVR runway 5R at less than 1/4 mi, minimums required for CAT ii, 1200 ft. Base leg, tower reported touchdown zone RVR 800 ft and fluctuating, rollout RVR 4000+ ft, runway and airport in sight, VFR conditions. Told tower we needed 1200 ft RVR outside marker. Tower said' it's improving, up to 1000 ft. Continue straight ahead and I'll give you a report at the marker.' runway and airport clearly in sight. I believe at the marker the tower said touchdown RVR 1000 ft, but was listening for 1200 and that is what registered since everything was so visible. Landing was uneventful and I estimate touchdown zone RVR at 5000 ft, rollout RVR 1500 ft. Contributing factors: flight had been previously delayed and we had minimum rest period coming up, less than 9 hours. Also, visibility was so good it was almost VFR, in-flight it was VFR. Heard what I wanted to hear and was familiar with the airport. It was too easy. Had the WX been obvious or ground fog visible, I would not have made the approach. There was no shortage of fuel and holding would have been feasible and prudent. Supplemental information from acn 459000: we decided that we would have to brief a CAT ii runway 5R pvd and use the autoland system. Neither the captain nor I have flown one in a while. We pulled out the manuals and reviewed the procedures, callouts, necessary equipment ground and flight, and also the RVR requirements. While passing the FAF, the tower once again told us touchdown zone RVR 1000 ft and rollout RVR 1400 ft. We acknowledged and reported runway 5R in sight. Crossing over the threshold at about 10 ft above the surface we encountered ground fog, but never lost visual contact with the runway. While at the gate, I questioned the captain 'was that approach legal?' at the layover hotel, I researched the manuals and concluded that even though we had continuous visual contact with the runway for 20 mi, we did not have the required touchdown zone RVR of 1200 ft, according to our operations specifications, and were therefore in violation. Problem arose from lack of detailed knowledge of operations specifications. Human factors: captain just back from 2 weeks sick, maybe not 100%. Myself, fifth duty day with 4 short layovers with lousy mattresses on the beds equals tired. I should have insisted on going missed but I, too, was lulled into landing with the runway clearly in sight.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN MD88 FLC LANDS AT PVD, RWY 5R AFTER A COUPLED CAT II APCH. RVR WAS 1000 FT VERSUS THE REQUIRED 1200 FT RVR. PVD, RI.

Narrative: POSSIBLE LNDG BELOW MINIMUMS AT NIGHT. PVD ARPT AND RWY 5R VISIBLE FROM 20 MI OUT. PATCHY GND FOG, APPROX 10% COVERAGE AND CAVU OTHERWISE. ATIS RPTED RVR RWY 5R AT LESS THAN 1/4 MI, MINIMUMS REQUIRED FOR CAT II, 1200 FT. BASE LEG, TWR RPTED TOUCHDOWN ZONE RVR 800 FT AND FLUCTUATING, ROLLOUT RVR 4000+ FT, RWY AND ARPT IN SIGHT, VFR CONDITIONS. TOLD TWR WE NEEDED 1200 FT RVR OUTSIDE MARKER. TWR SAID' IT'S IMPROVING, UP TO 1000 FT. CONTINUE STRAIGHT AHEAD AND I'LL GIVE YOU A RPT AT THE MARKER.' RWY AND ARPT CLRLY IN SIGHT. I BELIEVE AT THE MARKER THE TWR SAID TOUCHDOWN RVR 1000 FT, BUT WAS LISTENING FOR 1200 AND THAT IS WHAT REGISTERED SINCE EVERYTHING WAS SO VISIBLE. LNDG WAS UNEVENTFUL AND I ESTIMATE TOUCHDOWN ZONE RVR AT 5000 FT, ROLLOUT RVR 1500 FT. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: FLT HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY DELAYED AND WE HAD MINIMUM REST PERIOD COMING UP, LESS THAN 9 HRS. ALSO, VISIBILITY WAS SO GOOD IT WAS ALMOST VFR, INFLT IT WAS VFR. HEARD WHAT I WANTED TO HEAR AND WAS FAMILIAR WITH THE ARPT. IT WAS TOO EASY. HAD THE WX BEEN OBVIOUS OR GND FOG VISIBLE, I WOULD NOT HAVE MADE THE APCH. THERE WAS NO SHORTAGE OF FUEL AND HOLDING WOULD HAVE BEEN FEASIBLE AND PRUDENT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 459000: WE DECIDED THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO BRIEF A CAT II RWY 5R PVD AND USE THE AUTOLAND SYS. NEITHER THE CAPT NOR I HAVE FLOWN ONE IN A WHILE. WE PULLED OUT THE MANUALS AND REVIEWED THE PROCS, CALLOUTS, NECESSARY EQUIP GND AND FLT, AND ALSO THE RVR REQUIREMENTS. WHILE PASSING THE FAF, THE TWR ONCE AGAIN TOLD US TOUCHDOWN ZONE RVR 1000 FT AND ROLLOUT RVR 1400 FT. WE ACKNOWLEDGED AND RPTED RWY 5R IN SIGHT. XING OVER THE THRESHOLD AT ABOUT 10 FT ABOVE THE SURFACE WE ENCOUNTERED GND FOG, BUT NEVER LOST VISUAL CONTACT WITH THE RWY. WHILE AT THE GATE, I QUESTIONED THE CAPT 'WAS THAT APCH LEGAL?' AT THE LAYOVER HOTEL, I RESEARCHED THE MANUALS AND CONCLUDED THAT EVEN THOUGH WE HAD CONTINUOUS VISUAL CONTACT WITH THE RWY FOR 20 MI, WE DID NOT HAVE THE REQUIRED TOUCHDOWN ZONE RVR OF 1200 FT, ACCORDING TO OUR OPS SPECS, AND WERE THEREFORE IN VIOLATION. PROB AROSE FROM LACK OF DETAILED KNOWLEDGE OF OPS SPECS. HUMAN FACTORS: CAPT JUST BACK FROM 2 WKS SICK, MAYBE NOT 100%. MYSELF, FIFTH DUTY DAY WITH 4 SHORT LAYOVERS WITH LOUSY MATTRESSES ON THE BEDS EQUALS TIRED. I SHOULD HAVE INSISTED ON GOING MISSED BUT I, TOO, WAS LULLED INTO LNDG WITH THE RWY CLRLY IN SIGHT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.