If an autoland system is designed such that it can continue to a safe landing even after the failure of one component, that system is:

The autoland system being described as one that can continue to a safe landing even after the failure of one component is categorized as fail-operational. This classification indicates that the system is designed with redundancy and resilience in mind, allowing it to maintain operational capabilities despite the malfunction of certain components.

This is critical for safety in aviation, especially during Instrument Landing System (ILS) approaches where precision and reliability are paramount. A fail-operational system ensures that at least one alternative means remains functional, allowing the flight to safely conclude even in adverse conditions.

In contrast, a fail-passive system would not allow for safe operation if a component fails—it essentially would become non-operational instead. The term “fail-safe” implies mechanisms that prevent catastrophic outcomes in the event of a failure but does not guarantee continued operational capacity. Additionally, while systems that are fail-operational are often eligible for CAT III ILS approaches, mere approval does not define the ability of the system to handle component failures during operation. Thus, referring to the system as fail-operational is the most accurate characterization of its reliability and functionality as stated in the question.