Twin Turbine Route Distance Limitations <5700kg

[Dash 42]

G'day all,


I'm either missing something, or CAO 82.0 is written poorly... Does anybody have a reference for route distance limitations OEI to the nearest adequate aerodrome in a twin turbine BELOW 5700KG and LESS than 19 pax? Assume this is for a flight operated under an AOC authorising charter and RPT.

CAO 82.0 deals with distance limitations for piston-engined aeroplanes, 19 passengers or less and exceeding 5 700 kg, or more than 19 passengers or 3 410 kg payload... No turbine sub 5700KG, i.e. King Air 200, Conquest and so on.


Cheers,

Dash

[glekichi]

You may want to fix the title to get the attention of <5700kg pilots.

[Dash 42]

Oops, thanks.

[tail wheel]

I fixed it.

[waren9]

which goes to show what a mess the regulatory reform is in.

i've had a look and cant find one. cao 82 on the face of it doesn't apply, so presumably a 60 min rule does.

buggered if i can find that...

[compressor stall]

Nonsensical but might be 180 minutes?

Nothing in CAO 82.0 3BA etc but if you look at the definitions....

EDTO, or extended diversion time operation, means any flight by a turbine-engined aeroplane where the flight time at the 1 engine inoperative cruise speed (in ISA and still air conditions) from a point on the route to an adequate aerodrome is greater than the threshold time.

Then

Threshold time means:

(b) for an aeroplane engaged in passenger carrying operations but not certificated to carry more than 19 passengers — 180 minutes.

[waren9]

yeah i read that too.

[Dash 42]

Yes, but it's not automatically EDTO, that needs specific CASA approval... From CAAP 82-1(0):

2.1 Extended Diversion Time Operations (EDTO)

2.1 The EDTO approval process for large aeroplanes is valid for regular public transport (RPT) or charter operations which include certain cargo operations (see Civil Aviation Order (CAO) 82.0 3BC). To be eligible for EDTO, the specified airframe/engine combination must have been certificated to the airworthiness standards of Transport Category aeroplanes Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 25, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) CS25 or the equivalent.
2.2 Applications for approval to conduct EDTO should be made using a specific Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) form, available from CASA offices or via CASA’s website at Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Home (http://www.casa.gov.au). At least 90days should be allowed for processing by CASA, particularly in the case of new applications. It should be noted that the information requested in the form is comprehensive and providing it will assist operators in the planning of these operations.

This does however specify 'large' aeroplanes (yet 'large aeroplane' is not defined - in the CAAP). What a shambles.

Dash

[Defenestrator]

Large aircraft definition is in CAO 100.66.

large aircraft means:
(a) an aeroplane that has a maximum take-off weight (MTOW) of more than
5 700 kg; or
(b) a helicopter that is multi-engined.

D:ok:

[Dash 42]

Touché D!:ok:

Thanks for your input guys.

[601]

What a shambles.

And it continues:ugh:

[Dash 42]

And to spice things up some more, consider planning a takeoff with weather condition below the instrument approach minima, but above the applicable takeoff minima. Assume an IFR charter in a King Air 200.

AIP ENR 1.5 paragraph 4.3.3 (same reference in Jepp AU Terminal) allows a departure providing:

c. if a return to the departure aerodrome is not possible - - the aeroplane's performance and fuel availability must each be ad-equate to enable the aeroplane to proceed to a SUITABLE aerodrome, having regard to terrain, obstacles and route distance limitations.

I imagine they are talking about the need to return to land or proceed to a suitable aerodrome in the context of an engine failure / malfunction (or any number of eventualities). Assuming I actually knew the route distance limitation for multi engine turbine <5700KG, the phrase 'suitable' aerodrome is used in the above paragraph, where CAO 82.0 3BA etc refers to an 'ad-equate' aerodrome with the most critical engine inoperative.

If its good enough for the route distance limitations (whatever they are!) in CAO 82.0 to require an ad-equate aerodrome, why does it now have to be suitable for the sake of planning the takeoff?

Clear as mud.


Dash.

[ghw78]

As a large two holer driver for many years and having flown according to the rules of ETOPS now called EDTO (some states are still using the ETOPS Terminology), there is a difference between the requirements/ definitions of Adequate and Suitable.

In the RPT large aircraft environment an adequate airport (as defined by one set of criteria) is one that is

Runway has sufficient Length, Width and Load Classification capability for the aircraft.

An instrument approach

ATC or FIS

Meterological reporting/observations

Rescue Fire Service

Approach slope guidance

and under EDTO, adequate passenger handling capability.

Thus the airport is 'adequate' is a more generic qualification than

Suitable which is an 'on the day' requirement'

obviously if the last xxx of the runway is closed, it may not now meet the distance requirements

The big variable is the forecast/actual met conditions at the expected time of use.

An airport may tick all the 'adequate' boxes and be listed as such in the AOC or equivalent but if the weather is below minima say with fog then it will not be 'suitable' to be used

Depending on the state there may well be different criteria. regarding selection of an airport as

a departure alternate

a destination alternate

and enroute diversion (ETOPS/EDTO) alternate.

For example we are required to use a departure alternate when the airport we are departing from is above take off minima but below landing minima that is within 60 mins range however a destination alternate has no such time limit but fuel capability and depressurised flight may be influencing factors as to how far in flying time it may be.

[Dash 42]

ghw78,

You're quiet right. I had the impression that adequate aerodrome had wx conditions below alternate minima, but above landing minima... As per that horrible CASA planning exam.

Per 82.0:

adequate aerodrome, for an aeroplane, means an aerodrome which: (a) meets the physical requirements set out in Appendix 2; and
(b) provides facilities and services for the aeroplane type including:
(i) meteorologicalforecasts;and
(ii) atleast1suitableauthorisedinstrumentapproachprocedure.

Still, the original question remains un-answered. Am I to assume that multi turbine <5700KG is a regulatory black hole as far as route distance limitations are concerned? Obviousy, common sense prevails, but this seems to leave "The CASA" open.


Dash.

[compressor stall]

Hi Dash,

Re my definitions above, they are commensurate with your EDTO definition, as as such I think remain relevant for this discussion.

EDTO, or extended diversion time operation, means any flight by a turbine-engined aeroplane where the flight time at the 1 engine inoperative cruise speed (in ISA and still air conditions) from a point on the route to an adequate aerodrome is greater than the threshold time.

Operatirve word here is "Greater".
So if you're not greater than the threshold time (180 minutes) then you're fine (if fewer than 19 seats) unless there's another piece of covering legislation that hasn't been found yet.

I think....

[mattyj]

Bloody Aussie regs..join the rest of the world..90 mins single engine no wind..