V Australia to fly to South Africa, Thailand

[el_rooto]

V Australia launches fares to Thailand and South Africa | Cheap flights (http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/v-australia-launches-fares-to-thailand-and-south-africa-20090817-emvy.html)

--

Hi all,

I've been a long time lurker, but this is the first time I have posted. How can V Australia fly from Australia to SA in 777's without violating ETOPS? As far as I know, South African flies A340's on its Joberg-Perth route. I know SIA fly from Singapore - Joberg with twinjets, however that is because they use Diego Garcia as an emergency landing site. Could V be flying Aust - Thailand - Joberg?

Can anyone shed any light on this?

[our001]

well Air Mauritus flys 767's into SYD and out of MEL direct and also PER services.

Air Austral does SYD Renunion Island. on a 777

So maybe ETOPS is possible on a 777

[inandout]

Not called ETOPS now but EDTO and they will get 240min approved to do it.

[noip]

To fly SYD-JNB, Virgin will have to fly via / over Perth, then to Mauritius until they get within Etops range of FIMP before they can turn South to JNB. Whether they can make it one sector SYD-JNB that route, I'm not sure.

Even though it is a lot longer than the direct track, if they go via Perth, they could also tap into the South African / Rhodesian population living there, and anyway, the lower operating costs of the 777 will go a long way to offset the extra route distance.

N

[PCFlyer]

Whether they can make it one sector SYD-JNB that route, I'm not sure.

noip,

I know it's not that much shorter but the announcement was ...

Melbourne to Johannesburg, South Africa direct flights from 13 March 2010

[aulglarse]

Even with 180 min EDTO they could be(as a conservative guess on OEI speed)1200-1400nm away from ( via) PER to operate to JNB.

Quite happy to be corrected though.

[noip]

FWIW as a bit of a look-see.

This was the best I could do for Mel-Jnb on greatcirclemapper (http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=mel-per%0D%0Aper-fimp%0D%0Afimp-fajs%0D%0A&RANGE=&PATH-COLOR=red&PATH-UNITS=nm&PATH-MINIMUM=&SPEED-GROUND=430&SPEED-UNITS=kts&RANGE-STYLE=best&RANGE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=&ETOPS=207&ETOPS=240)

It puts the distance at 6300 nm .... allowing for going South of FIMP, it will still be about 6200 nm. Whilst the 777 does LAX-MEL at about 6900 nm, the MEL-JNB track via Per is entirely in strong headwinds, and allowing for some weather holding at JNB, it will be do-able, but at times, tight.

Direct (http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=syd-jnb%0D%0A&RANGE=&PATH-COLOR=red&PATH-UNITS=nm&PATH-MINIMUM=&SPEED-GROUND=470&SPEED-UNITS=kts&RANGE-STYLE=best&RANGE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=&ETOPS=207&ETOPS=240) Syd-Jnb is about 6000 nm - but with the flexibility of avoiding some of the Jetstream activity - the great circle track not an option for the 777.

For Completeness ... Mel-Jnb direct (http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=mel-jnb%0D%0A&RANGE=&PATH-COLOR=red&PATH-UNITS=nm&PATH-MINIMUM=&SPEED-GROUND=470&SPEED-UNITS=kts&RANGE-STYLE=best&RANGE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=&ETOPS=207&ETOPS=240) track 5600nm.

So it will be at least an hour longer (maybe two) on the 777 to go Mel-Jnb than for the 747 to go Syd-Jnb. But the 777 gets to stay closer to civilisation and miss a few hours over the ice-pack. :)

N

[Capt Fathom]

With 240 mins, you will still have to deviate north of the Great Circle Route (http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=mel-jnb-per%0D%0A&RANGE=&PATH-COLOR=red&PATH-UNITS=nm&PATH-MINIMUM=&MARKER=1&SPEED-GROUND=0.83&SPEED-UNITS=Mach&RANGE-STYLE=outline&RANGE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=&ETOPS=180&ETOPS=240)


Oops, beaten to the punch!

[maui]

I believe the announcement said "direct flights" as in non stop.

I do not recall any announcement of Great Circle flights. So how do you conclude that it would be in breach of ETOPS/EDTO rules.:ugh:

Maui

[inandout]

MEL-JNB with 240 EDTO is around 5804NM, which is what VA will do. Flights are not via Perth. EDTO approval is in the works now.

[Comoman]

What a great opportunity lost to tap into the expat crowd in Perth. Many people I know would gladly jettison SAA trying to get to JHB. Expensive, poor service. The list can go on and on.....

[noip]

maui,

Navigation / Etops 101 .....

Great Circle route is the most direct track between any two points on the planet. In this case, this route Mel-Jnb is not an approved Etops route - it carries a twin too far from an adequate airport (they have to remain within 120 / 180 / 207 / 240 minutes at single engine speed in still air from those airports).

So, the 747 can fly the great circle route in this case, but the 777 cannot - it must fly a longer route to keep closer to an adequate airport (in this case Adelaide / Perth / Mauritius / Durban). Of course an important point here is what Etops approval V will have for their aircraft. 180 min is pretty standard these days, but 207 or 240 min are new for Australia, and ANY Etops approval requires a lot of work on the part of the Airline.

So, the point is, how much longer is the route the 777 will have to fly to get to Jnb, and what impact will it have on its operation? Both the 747 and 777 fly direct, it is just that the 777 cannot avail itself of the shortest route.

I trust that clears up your mis-understanding ...

N

[Wizofoz]

Great circle may be the SHORTEST route, but it is not necessarily the QUICKEST route, due to wind.

[maui]

Noip

Thankyou for that educational piece.

Navigation EDTO 102. Direct does not necessarily mean by the shortest route, it means non stop. RTFA! :ugh:

Maui

[noip]

maui,

You obviously do not share my curiosity as to the routing the 777 will fly mel-jnb and the other things that will impact its operation.

In this case, the great circle track IS the quickest both in track distance and with prevailing wind, by a considerable margin. And that was the point of my post. Whilst the 777 can make it Mel-Jnb non-stop, the track it will be forced to fly will suffer both wind and distance penalties that will no doubt impact on available payload.

As a couple of people have pointed out, a transit Perth to take advantage of the market there seems pretty obvious, however as usual, marketing people know best. :eek:

It would also be interesting to see how or if BRW is limited out of Jnb on the return.

Hope you feel better soon ......... :)

N

[maui]

Noip

Go back to the original post. The question was


How can V Australia fly from Australia to SA in 777's without violating ETOPS?


Whereupon you proceeded to impress everyone with your grasp of EDTO operations and Great Circle tracking.

I merely pointed out that there was nothing in the report that suggested great circle, and intimated that EDTO was a possibility if one stayed away from the great circle. I am sorry if that point was lost on you.

I am really impressed with your grasp of the EDTO concept, pity you are not that flash at understanding written communications.

Maui:ok:

[sandpit]

Actually Maui, Direct in most airlines marketing departments means you don't change aircraft - but you may tech stop.

We pilots think of direct meaning non stop but thats not what the kings of spin think!

[maui]

So when I press "Direct To" I can stop provided I don't get off.:eek:

[noip]

m

whatever.


n

[MrWooby]

Direct flights mean you board a/c at the departure airport and get off at the destination with no stops (whether you get off or not) in between. Marketing departments have nothing to do what track the a/c takes, great circle or whatever. No press release would ever differentiate what track the a/c takes.

Maui, you probably didn't mean but the way you worded your post showed a complete misunderstanding of direct/great circle tracks. As would be expected in a novice pilots response. Hence noips explanation re great circle, only trying to help. Talk about a misunderstanding.

Not sure if it has been approved or if CASA would approve it but Boeing was trying to certify the 777-300ER to 330 min etops, this would allow great circle track SYD or MEL to Joburg. Also 4 engine etops comes into effect in 2015, not sure what effect that will have on 4 eng ops.

[MAX]

Their website says 'non stop'.

:ugh:

[Comoman]

From watoday.com.au today:

"Virgin has previously talked of flying to Hong Kong and Tokyo but Mr Godfrey said it was more likely V Australia would increase flights between Melbourne and South Africa (via Perth) and across the Pacific before expanding its international network further."

Notice the via Perth


link: Virgin Blue cautious on recovery (http://business.watoday.com.au/business/virgins-blues-on-the-pacific-route-20090827-f0fb.html)

[flyergirl]

Direct means...same flight number regardless of number of stops.EG QF1 to LHR goes via BKK, but is still QF1 'direct' to LHR.

Non stop means no stopping anywhere on route to destination.

Confused? yes, me too, but that is how it is.


Not commenting on what VA may be doing, just on the clarification of direct and non stop.

[inandout]

Will be VIA Perth not direct as first reported, that is solid.

[737NG_Girl]

Banner on the V Australia website quotes "Non-Stop Melbourne to Johannesburg", although it wouldn't be the first time their marketing and commercial teams haven't been communicating with each other...

http://www.vaustralia.com.au/cms/groups/marketing/documents/internetcontent/p_009813.jpg

[el_rooto]

Thank you for everyone's help in clearing that up.

[Capt Fathom]

v-australias-longhaul-burden (http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/v-australias-longhaul-burden-20100324-qwd9.html)

If the article is acurate, doesn't look like V-OZ got any relief from the 180min rule, as some were predicting!

[maui]

Capt. Fathom

I woudn't be gloating too much.

When the EDTO fire suppression limits are applied to all aircraft , in the near future, the 744 will be equally stuffed.

Maui

[Capt Fathom]

Who's gloating?

Merely pointing out the article. I'm sure there is still much negotiation going on in the backgroud.

The article bravely states how much safer B747's are! I know which one I'd rather travel on!

[neville_nobody]

Yet another aviation article where the author really has no idea what's going on.......

In latitudes near the South Pole, the prevailing winds, often called the "Roaring Forties" because of the latitude and the wind strength, generally come from the west at a minimum of 40 knots (74 kilometres an hour) but can be 100 knots-plus.

Yeah at sea level........that has nothing to do with the high level jetstream and the 100kt head winds the 777 is pushing into.

The 747 is considered so reliable it faces few restrictions on where it is allowed to fly.

No it has nothing to do with reliability it has to do with redundancy. 4 engines = four sources of electrical power and thrust etc etc. You could lose two engines........highly unlikely and still be ok. If that happened in a 777 then you are swimming.

And hence the regulation over fire suppression......it is about redundancy.

In its certification program, Boeing flew the 777-300ER as far as 5½ hours from the nearest airport and it performed flawlessly.

Well that didn't help the United crew who shut one down just past the PNR in the middle of the night over the Pacific!!! They then flew for 192 minutes on one engine!!! :ooh:

Why is it in a age where so much information is accessible to so many people a journalist cannot write an accurate article about aviation in a newspaper??

[halas]

ETOPS is the least of their problems. When the crew get back to MEL with empty suitcases or even non at all, then you know you have been Jo-burged!

Halas

[airtags]

I thought there was also an issue with their CC's duty limits re: JNB (??) with the airline wanting to push it out further -
- seem to recall reading somewhere a few weeks ago that their union had gone to the commission on the matter.

Any details? - just curious.

AT

[Wizofoz]

The word is the 777 is T/O weight limited due second segment out of Johannesburg

I can confirm that. Usually restricted to about the 320T mark.

No problem JNB-DXB, but MEL would be a stretch!

[404 Titan]

Wizofoz

With an average minimum temperature during the hottest time of the year of 14°C, you could expect the temperature to be around 20°C by the Vaus departure time of 8:30pm. A quick look at an RTOW for one of our 777-300ER’s out of JNB reveals a max ATOW of 320.3T for RWY 21R (up hill), 20°C, 1013, 0 Wind, F15, Packs Off or APU to Packs, Alt CG ≥ 31.2% and TO Bump. The max structural TOW for our ER’s is 351.53T so there is still quite a weight penalty (31.23T) to be suffered at this time of the day. If you compare this to one of our 400’s with the same conditions the weight penalty is about 22T’s.

Looking at the Vaus web site they have scheduled the MEL → JNB sector in 16 hours which is doable for the -300ER and JNB → MEL in 13 hours. The distance is 5572.5 nm which looks like they are doing both sectors non-stop.

[Wizofoz]

Minimum fuel for a 13hr sector is in the region of 120T, so with a MZFW of 237T, they will definatley be payload limited to the tune of 37 Tonnes!!

DOWs are usually around 175, so that leaves them with the the princely sum of around 25T payload.

Our 15 hr SFO flights in a 300ER are restricted to about 220T ZFW


Sorry, something does not compute.

[Capt Fathom]

6400 Statute Miles !

[404 Titan]

Wizofoz

We (CX) operate the ER,s to JNB in the winter with similar flight times of 13 hours return. We do it nonstop but I will concede that the payload is very limited. It isn’t the ideal aircraft for the sector. By far the best aircraft we operated there was the A340-600 but they are now history.
Just for interest we operate the ER’s nonstop to JFK from HKG with a similar sector length to you DXB to SFO. These flights too are limited to a ZFW of about 220T because they are at MTOW. That unfortunately is the nature of ULH ops though.

So do I think Vaus can operate the -300ER’s nonstop to and from JNB from MEL? Yes. Are they making money? Questionable, especially with the sector time to JNB.

[404 Titan]

DirectAnywhere

As Capt Fathom has said, that is Statute Miles not Nautical Miles. Unfortunately that is a very common mistake when one uses an American aviation web site.

[Red Jet]

Great Circle Mapper, quite correctly shows the distance from Melbourne to Johannesburg to be 5582NM. The EDTO rules applied by VOZ, hasthe aircraft remaining within 1340NM of a useable airport. Coasting out over Geraldton, you can route straight for Mauritius, followed by a slight dog-leg towards destination. Not as inefficient as it seems, as you are staying away from the roaring forties more often than not. Of greater consequense is that the return flight from JNB-MEL doesn't get to take advantage of favourable tailwinds to the extent one would desire. Some payload restriction out of JNB for ultra long haul is a fact of life, regardless of type. The economics of the 300ER is still VERY hard to beat!

[neville_nobody]

At a guess I would say this would be close to what they are doing.
As you can see it is a long way off the great circle and straight into the headwinds. Might see some record low ground speeds over the winter!!

Great Circle Mapper (http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=JNB-25%B0+0%2717.58%22S+81%B021%2711.14%22E-+30%B028%2733.83%22S+88%B0+7%2729.69%22E-MEL-jnb%0D%0A%0D%0A&R=1200nm%40per%2C+1200nm%40mru%2C+1200nm%40cck%2C+&MS=wls&DU=nm&E=180)

[halas]

Unless they have some form of dispensation, l don't think YPCC could be used as an ETOPS suitable airport for a 777. The pavement strength alone is good for emergency use only.

halas

[neville_nobody]

Well if that's the case then I'd be buggered as to how they'd do it, as they would only be heading further north and off track. The next nearest alternate would be Male I'd assume.

[halas]

They may get approval for Diego Garcia? Dunno.

Otherwise Jakarta, Medan, Male, Seychelles and Mauritius are the go after crossing the coast and leaving Perth and Learmonth behind.

halas

[Going Boeing]

Halas, I suspect that they have been given a dispensation to use Cocos. The RAAF P3's have been using Cocos for many years and they have a very high pavement requirement - approx 190psi tyres on a single axle. V Oz will probably never actually go there, so a dispensation to use it as an emergency alternate is realistic.

[slice]

180 EDTO coverage is YPPH WIII FJDG FIMP FAJS which means coming up to about 20S.

[Transition Layer]

And this is the end result :ok:

http://photos-b.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs467.snc3/25659_10150149318495165_907915164_11744180_1722676_n.jpg

(taken from the tripler IFE system)

[Capt Fathom]

Wouldn't be too keen on following that Red Line (http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=ymml-fajs&R=1300nm%40YPPH%2C+1300nm%40WIII%2C+1300nm%40FJDG%2C+1300nm% 40FIMP%2C+1300nm%40FAJS&MS=wls&DU=mi&E=180&EV=430&EU=kts)! :uhoh:

[ga_trojan]

So what happened on Transition Layers flight?? They're way south of the 21st parallel!:eek:

[Capt Fathom]

I would suggest the IFE plots departure point to present position, rather than the actual route flown!